United States v. Michael Tinlin ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 20-2862
    ___________________________
    United States of America,
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    Michael Christian Tinlin,
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Iowa - Central
    ____________
    Submitted: September 21, 2021
    Filed: December 15, 2021
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    COLLOTON, Circuit Judge.
    Michael Tinlin pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute 500 grams or more of
    methamphetamine, see 
    21 U.S.C. § 846
    , and to possession of a firearm in furtherance
    of a drug trafficking offense, 
    18 U.S.C. § 924
    (c). In determining an advisory
    sentencing range under the sentencing guidelines, the district court1 concluded that
    Tinlin qualified as a career offender based on two prior convictions for a crime of
    violence. See USSG § 4B1.1(a). The court thus determined an advisory range of 322
    to 387 months’ imprisonment and then varied downward from the range to impose
    a sentence of 300 months. Tinlin argues that the court miscalculated the advisory
    guideline range because one of his prior convictions does not qualify as a crime of
    violence, and that he should not have been treated as a career offender. We conclude
    that there was no error, and therefore affirm.
    The dispute concerns the offense of domestic abuse assault, in violation of
    
    Iowa Code §§ 708.1
    (1) and 708.2A(2)(c). Under the so-called “force clause” of the
    career-offender guideline, a conviction qualifies as a “crime of violence” if it is an
    “offense under federal or state law, punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding
    one year,” that “has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of
    physical force against the person of another.” USSG §§ 4B1.1(a), 4B1.2(a). The
    Iowa offense is punishable by more than a year in prison, and the elements require
    proof that an offender (1) committed an assault against a person with an enumerated
    domestic relationship to the offender, 
    Iowa Code § 708
    .2A(1), and (2) did so with
    intent to inflict serious injury upon another, or used or displayed a dangerous weapon
    in connection with the assault. 
    Id.
     § 708.2A(2)(c). The alternatives specified in the
    second element appear to be different means of committing a single offense. State
    v. Michael, Nos. 0-602, 99-1578, 
    2000 WL 1675715
    , at *2 (Iowa Ct. App. Nov. 8,
    2000). Tinlin does not dispute that the Iowa offense would qualify as a crime of
    violence if the offender displayed a dangerous weapon in connection with the assault,
    see United States v. McGee, 
    890 F.3d 730
    , 735-37 (8th Cir. 2018), but he argues that
    domestic abuse assault with intent to inflict serious injury does not necessarily require
    1
    The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for
    the Southern District of Iowa.
    -2-
    the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of
    another.
    The logic of our circuit precedent dictates that Iowa domestic abuse assault
    with intent to inflict serious injury is a crime of violence. In United States v. Quigley,
    
    943 F.3d 390
     (8th Cir. 2019), this court held that the Iowa offense of assault with
    intent to inflict serious injury under 
    Iowa Code § 708.2
    (1) is a crime of violence
    under the force clause of the guideline. The offense at issue in Quigley required proof
    that the offender committed an assault, as defined in 
    Iowa Code § 708.1
    , with the
    intent to inflict on another person a serious injury, as defined in 
    Iowa Code § 702.18
    .
    We concluded that there is no realistic probability that an offender could be convicted
    of that offense, including the element of intent to inflict serious injury, without at
    least threatening to use physical force against another. 943 F.3d at 395.
    Tinlin’s offense, domestic abuse assault with intent to inflict serious injury,
    likewise required an assault committed with intent to inflict serious injury. 
    Iowa Code § 708
    .2A(1), (2)(c); R. Doc. 41-1, 41-2. The “domestic abuse” element of the
    offense requires proof that the victim had an enumerated domestic relationship to the
    offender, see 
    Iowa Code § 236.2
    (2)(a)-(d), but it does not change the elements of
    assault or intent to inflict serious injury. Given the conclusion in Quigley that an
    assault with intent to inflict serious injury against any person necessarily requires at
    least a threatened use of physical force, it follows that the same assault offense
    committed against a person with a domestic relationship likewise requires at least a
    threatened use of physical force. Accordingly, we conclude that Tinlin’s offense is
    a crime of violence under the force clause, and the district court made no procedural
    error in calculating Tinlin’s guideline range.
    The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-2862

Filed Date: 12/15/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/15/2021