Filed: Jan. 13, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-3974 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Timothy D. Still, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * _ Submitted: January 9, 2006 Filed: January 13, 2006 _ Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Timothy D. Still pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. After the Supreme Court decided Blakely v. Washington
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-3974 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Timothy D. Still, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * _ Submitted: January 9, 2006 Filed: January 13, 2006 _ Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Timothy D. Still pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. After the Supreme Court decided Blakely v. Washington,..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 04-3974
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the Eastern
v. * District of Missouri.
*
Timothy D. Still, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: January 9, 2006
Filed: January 13, 2006
___________
Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Timothy D. Still pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm.
After the Supreme Court decided Blakely v. Washington,
124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), but
before the Court decided United States v. Booker,
125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), the district
court* sentenced Still to sixty months in prison and two years of supervised release.
Still appeals.
*
The Honorable Henry E. Autrey, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
Acknowledging our contrary case law, see United States v. Nolan,
397 F.3d
665, 666-67 (8th Cir. 2005), Still first argues the district court committed error in
classifying his earlier conviction for burglarizing a commercial building as a crime
of violence. We must follow our earlier holdings foreclosing Still’s argument,
however, and only the court en banc can overrule them. United States v. Purkey,
428
F.3d 738, 762-63 (8th Cir. 2005).
Still also asserts the Sixth Amendment requires that his earlier conviction be
proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. We have recognized that even after
Booker, the fact of an earlier conviction is for the court, not a jury.
Nolan, 397 F.3d
at 667 n.2; United States v. Cerna-Salguero,
399 F.3d 887, 887-88 (8th Cir. 2005); see
Apprendi v. New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466, 489-90 (2000);
Booker, 125 S. Ct. at 756.
We thus affirm Still’s sentence.
______________________________
-2-