United States v. Lamont Bailey, No. 22-3394 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Defendant pleaded guilty to Possession of a Firearm by a Felon in violation. The district court sentenced him to 100 months imprisonment. Bailey appealed the sentence, arguing the court erred by increasing his base offense level under USSG Section 2K2.1(a)(2), based on two prior Illinois convictions for Delivery or Manufacture of Cocaine in violation of 720 ILCS 570/206(b)(4); and by applying a four-level increase under Section 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) because he used a firearm in connection with another felony offense, Intimidation with a Dangerous Weapon in violation of Iowa Code Section 708.6(2).
The Eighth Circuit affirmed. The court explained that Defendant contends he is entitled to this stand-your-ground exception, despite being a felon in possession, because his illegal activity was not germane to his use of force against the person who was shooting at him. The court explained that the Supreme Court disagreed. Thus, his “possession of the handgun was germane to the use of deadly force.” Further, the court wrote that here, the district court found that Defendant did not have “reason to believe that somebody was actually shooting at him or endangering his life.” Thus, even if Defendant had no duty to retreat, his use of force was not necessary to avoid injury or harm to himself (or to anyone else).
Court Description: [Loken, Author, with Wollman and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err in increasing defendant's base offense level under Guidelines Sec. 2K2.1(a)(2) based on his two prior Illinois convictions for Delivery or Manufacture of Cocaine in violation of 720 ILCS 570/206(b)(4) or by applying a four-level enhancement under Sec. 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) because he used a firearm in connection with another felony offense, Intimidation with a Dangerous Weapon in violation of Iowa Code Sec. 708.6(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.