United States v. Henry Eilders ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 21-2352
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Henry Wilke Eilders
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
    ____________
    Submitted: April 11, 2022
    Filed: May 19, 2022
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before SMITH, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Henry Wilke Eilders pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute a controlled
    substance, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846, and
    possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A). The conspiracy occurred from summer 2018 to
    March 10, 2020, primarily in Linn County and Des Moines County, Iowa, and the
    possession with intent to distribute occurred on March 10, 2020, in Linn County.
    The presentence report scored one criminal history point for Eilders’s state
    sentence relating to his September 2016 possession of methamphetamine in Tama
    County, Iowa, and one point for Eilders’s state sentence relating to his September
    2017 possession of methamphetamine in Black Hawk County, Iowa. Although
    Eilders did not object to the assessment of these criminal history points, the district
    court1 nonetheless found that the state offenses were separate from the federal offense
    conduct and thus were properly scored under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. The
    district court also added two criminal history points because Eilders committed the
    federal offense while under criminal justice sentences for the Iowa offenses. Eilders’s
    Guidelines sentencing range was 236 to 294 months’ imprisonment. The district
    court varied downward and imposed a 230-month sentence.
    We conclude that the district court did not plainly err in assessing the two
    criminal history points for the sentences related to Eilders’s 2016 and 2017
    methamphetamine possession offenses. See United States v. Olano, 
    507 U.S. 725
    ,
    732 (1993) (standard of review); United States v. Ault, 
    598 F.3d 1039
    , 1041 (8th Cir.
    2010) (“If the conduct is part of the instant offense, it is relevant conduct and is
    considered in the calculation of the defendant’s offense level, not the criminal history
    category.”); U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1 (assessing points for certain “prior sentences”);
    U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2 (defining “prior sentence” as “any sentence previously imposed . . .
    for conduct not part of the instant offense”). Eilders’s state offenses were severable
    and distinct from his federal offenses because they occurred well before the charged
    conspiracy, they involved only small quantities of methamphetamine, they did not
    involve distribution, they were not used to prove the federal offenses, they occurred
    1
    The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern
    District of Iowa.
    -2-
    in different Iowa counties, and there were no common victims. See United States v.
    Campbell-Martin, 
    17 F.4th 807
    , 818–19 (8th Cir. 2021) (district court did not clearly
    err in determining defendant’s prior offense was not relevant conduct because there
    was a four-month gap between the offenses, there was no common scheme or
    purpose, the prior offense involved different controlled substance, the offenses
    occurred in two different Iowa counties, and there were no common victims), petition
    for cert. filed, 
    90 U.S.L.W. 3326
     (U.S. Apr. 11, 2022) (No. 21-1344). The district
    court also properly assessed Eilders two criminal history points for committing the
    federal offense while under the Iowa sentences. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d).
    The judgment is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-2352

Filed Date: 5/19/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 5/19/2022