Background
During a traffic stop, an officer smelled marijuana and saw smoked joints in the car. A search uncovered 10 grams of marijuana and a loaded pistol. West then texted his girlfriend and instructed her to claim that the items belonged to her. She initially told police that she had left her gun in the car but retracted that statement four months later.
West conditionally pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm after convictions for a felony and a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and (9). He reserved facial Second Amendment challenges to both provisions. The district court sentenced him to 112 months after applying enhancements for attempting to obstruct justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 and possessing the firearm in connection with another felony offense under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth Circuit affirmed. It concluded that circuit precedent foreclosed West’s facial Second Amendment challenges to both § 922(g)(1) and § 922(g)(9).
The court also upheld both sentencing enhancements. West attempted to impede the investigation by recruiting his girlfriend to falsely claim the gun and drugs, and the obstruction enhancement did not require his effort to succeed. The firearm enhancement was supported by West’s prior marijuana convictions, recent text messages about supplying marijuana, and his concurrent possession of drugs and a loaded firearm in a car. That evidence allowed a reasonable factfinder to connect the gun to drug dealing even though the marijuana quantity could also have been consistent with personal use.
Key Takeaways
- Eighth Circuit precedent forecloses facial Second Amendment challenges to the federal firearm prohibitions applicable to felons and persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence.
- An unsuccessful attempt to persuade another person to provide a false account can support an obstruction-of-justice enhancement.
- A defendant’s drug-dealing history, recent communications about supplying drugs, and simultaneous possession of drugs and a firearm may establish the connection required by U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
Why It Matters
The unpublished decision reinforces the breadth of the obstruction enhancement: recruiting a witness to lie may trigger it even when the attempted deception does not prejudice the government’s case. It also shows that courts may consider circumstantial evidence beyond the quantity of drugs found when deciding whether a firearm was connected to drug distribution.