United States v. Sherrod, No. 18-2976 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that the common law knock-and-announce rule does not apply when officers enter an open door and that the officers conduct was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. In this case, the district court did not clearly err when it found defendant's son entered the family house without closing the door, and the officer entered defendant's home with a felony arrest warrant and a reasonable belief he was present.
The court also held that the district court did not procedurally err when it overruled defendant's objection to an obstruction of justice enhancement where defendant gave deceptive testimony that the front door was kicked open. Furthermore, the sentence was not substantively unreasonable where the district court considered a variety of factors at sentencing and did not abuse its discretion by sentencing defendant to the statutory maximum penalty of 120 months in prison when the Guidelines recommended he serve between 235 and 293 months in prison.
Court Description: [Kobes, Author, with Gruender and Stras, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. The district court did not clearly err when it found defendant's son entered the family house without closing the door; the knock-and-announce rule does not apply when officers enter a home through an open door; officer had a felony arrest warrant for defendant and a reasonable belief that he was present in the home, and his entry into the home was reasonable; no error in applying an enhancement of justice based on the court's conclusion that defendant gave false testimony at the suppression hearing; the district court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing defendant to the statutory maximum of 120 months when the recommended Guidelines sentence was 235 to 293 months.
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.