United States v. Miller, No. 20-2857 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a felon. The court concluded that the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress and rejected defendant's Franks challenge where the alleged omissions were not clearly critical to the issuing judge's finding of probable cause. Without deciding whether exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry, the court concluded that any illegality in the entry was not the but-for cause of obtaining the evidence.
The court also concluded that defendant's contention that the National Firearms Act is unconstitutional is foreclosed by Supreme Court precedent. Finally, the court concluded that there was no error in the district court's calculation of a base offense level under USSG 4B1.2(b) based on a prior controlled substance offense; in imposing an enhancement under USSG 2K2.1(a)(3) based on the length of the shotgun's barrel; and in imposing an enhancement under USSG 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possession of the weapon in connection with another offense - assault by use or display of a dangerous weapon.
Court Description: [Smith, Author, with Shepherd and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Alleged omissions in the search warrant application were not critical to the issuing judge's finding of probable cause as none of the omissions bore on the witnesses' consistent statements that defendant had displayed a shotgun in a threatening manner in violation of Iowa law; as a result, the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress under Franks; without deciding whether exigent circumstances justified law enforcement's warrantless entry into defendant's residence, any illegality in the entry was not the but-for cause of obtaining the evidence; Second Amendment challenge to National Firearms Act rejected; the district court did not err in calculating defendant's base offense level under Guidelines Sec. 4B1.2(b) by concluding he had a prior controlled-substance offense; the court did not err in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2K2.1(a)(3) based on the length of the shotgun's barrel; nor did the court err in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possession of the weapon in connection with another offense - assault by use or display of a dangerous weapon.
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.