United States v. Michael Scott Boyles ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 00-2367
    ___________
    United States of America,                 *
    *
    Appellee,             * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the District
    v.                                  * of Minnesota.
    *
    Michael Scott Boyles,                     *     [PUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.            *
    ___________
    Submitted: December 12, 2000
    Filed: December 19, 2000
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, HEANEY, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Michael Scott Boyles pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of firearm in
    violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1). Concluding Boyles had "three previous convictions
    . . . for a violent felony . . . committed on occasions different from one another," 
    18 U.S.C. § 924
    (e), the district court sentenced Boyles to the statutory mandatory
    minimum sentence of fifteen years in prison. On appeal, Boyles contends he does not
    qualify for sentencing under § 924(e) because his two second-degree criminal sexual
    conduct convictions were committed on the same occasion. According to Boyles, the
    district court erroneously considered the facts underlying the convictions to conclude
    they were committed at different times. In Boyles's view, the district court is limited
    to the charging documents and statutory language. Contrary to Boyles's argument,
    Taylor v. United States, 
    495 U.S. 575
     (1990) and U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 do not limit the
    evidence a sentencing court may examine to decide whether earlier offenses were
    committed on different occasions. See United States v. Thomas, 
    211 F.3d 316
    , 318 n.3
    (6th Cir. 2000); United States v. Hudspeth, 
    42 F.3d 1015
    , 1018 n.3 (7th Cir. 1994) (en
    banc). Indeed, our opinions on this issue have involved consideration of the specific
    facts underlying the earlier convictions. E.g., United States v. Hamell, 
    3 F.3d 1187
    ,
    1191 (8th Cir. 1993).
    Here, each assault complaint involves a different minor girl, and asserts Boyles
    molested the victim from February 1, 1992 through January 1, 1993. Further, Boyles's
    confession establishes the sexual misconduct occurred at separate times, when Boyles
    was alone with one of the girls. The district court correctly decided the offenses were
    separate and distinct criminal episodes, see 
    id.,
     and thus properly counted them as two
    separate felonies. The district court did not commit error in failing to apply the rule
    of lenity.
    Boyles's conviction is affirmed.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-