United States v. Peggy Worthington ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 18-3382
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Peggy Jean Worthington
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines
    ____________
    Submitted: September 23, 2019
    Filed: December 9, 2019
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before SMITH, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and BEAM, Circuit Judges
    ____________
    PER CURIAM
    Peggy Jean Worthington pleaded guilty to one count of possession with intent
    to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture containing methamphetamine in
    violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). The district court1 determined that
    Worthington qualified as a career offender under § 4B1.1(a)(3) of the U.S. Sentencing
    Guidelines (“Guidelines”), because she had one prior felony conviction of a crime of
    violence and one prior felony conviction of a controlled substance offense. As a
    career offender, Worthington’s advisory Guidelines range sentence was 262 to 327
    months’ imprisonment. The district court departed downward under Guidelines
    § 5K1.1 on the basis of Worthington’s substantial assistance, varied downward on the
    basis of the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and sentenced
    Worthington to 140 months’ imprisonment. Worthington appeals, arguing that her
    2014 Iowa conviction for assault while displaying a dangerous weapon in violation
    of Iowa Code § 708.2(3) does not qualify as a crime of violence under Guidelines
    § 4B1.2(a).
    Worthington’s argument is foreclosed by our precedent. In United States v.
    McGee, we held that assault while displaying a dangerous weapon in violation of
    Iowa Code § 708.2(3) categorically qualified as a crime of violence under Guidelines
    § 4B1.2(a)(1). 
    890 F.3d 730
    , 736-37 (8th Cir. 2018). Section 4B1.2(a)(1) defines
    “crime of violence” to include any felony offense that “has as an element the use,
    attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another . . . .”
    The offense of conviction requires “us[ing] or display[ing] a dangerous weapon” in
    committing assault, see Iowa Code § 708.2(3), and assault is defined to include
    “intentionally point[ing] any firearm toward another, or display[ing] in a threatening
    manner any dangerous weapon toward another,” see Iowa Code
    § 708.1. Accordingly, we concluded that the Iowa offense of assault while displaying
    a dangerous weapon had as an element the “threatened use of physical force against
    the person of another,” § 4B1.2(a)(1), because “displaying an operational weapon
    before another in an angry or threatening manner qualifies as a threatened use of
    1
    The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for
    the Southern District of Iowa.
    -2-
    physical 
    force,” 890 F.3d at 736-37
    (quoting United States v. Pulliam, 
    566 F.3d 784
    ,
    788 (8th Cir. 2009)). McGee applies here, and the district court thus did not err in
    applying the career offender enhancement.
    Moreover, the district court stated that it would have imposed the same
    sentence, even if the Iowa offense did not constitute a crime of violence. The district
    court exercised great care in weighing the § 3553(a) sentencing factors when
    imposing Worthington’s sentence. Any error in determining that Worthington was
    a career offender under Guidelines § 4B1.1 thus would be harmless. See United
    States v. Dace, 
    842 F.3d 1067
    , 1069 (8th Cir. 2016) (per curiam) (“[W]hen a district
    court’s detailed explanation for the sentence imposed makes ‘clear that the judge
    based the sentence he or she selected on factors independent of the Guidelines,’ the
    error may be harmless.” (quoting Molina-Martinez v. United States, 
    136 S. Ct. 1338
    ,
    1347 (2016))) .
    The judgment is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-3382

Filed Date: 12/9/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/9/2019