United States v. Christopher Simpson, No. 10-3255 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err in determining defendant could be sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act or in rejecting his challenge to use of a conviction obtained while he was a juvenile; defendant was tried as an adult for the offense in question and it qualified as a predicate offense; even without the contested conviction, defendant had three qualifying offenses.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 10-3255 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Christopher Simpson, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: June 13, 2011 Filed: June 23, 2011 ___________ Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM Christopher Simpson appeals his sentence of 180 months' imprisonment for being a felon in possession of a firearm, see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The single issue that he raises is whether the district court1 erred in enhancing his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), because he had three prior convictions for violent felonies. The district court concluded that Mr. Simpson had four such convictions, and the defendant conceded below that he had two; but he maintains on appeal that his Missouri conviction for second-degree robbery did not 1 The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. qualify for the enhancement because he committed that offense when he was seventeen years old. While it is true that only certain convictions for juvenile delinquency can serve as predicate offenses under the ACCA, see 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B), and Mr. Simpson's robbery conviction is not one of those, he was tried and convicted as an adult for that robbery. There is thus no occasion to doubt that this offense counted under § 924(e). See United States v. Nash, 627 F.3d 693, 695-96 (8th Cir. 2010), cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 1837 (2011). The district court concluded, moreover, that Mr. Simpson's prior conviction for domestic battery was a violent felony under § 924(e), and Mr. Simpson does not challenge that holding on appeal. Because he has conceded that he has two other qualifying convictions in addition to the one for domestic battery, even without the contested robbery conviction Mr. Simpson's prior crimes qualify him for the ACCA enhancement. Affirmed. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
