[Download] "United States v. Stuckey" by Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: United States v. Stuckey
- Author : Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals
- Release Date : January 06, 2001
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 54 KB
Description
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas Submitted: April 10, 2001 We review for a second time Jimmy Lee Stuckey, Jr.'s conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). In his first appeal, Stuckey argued that the district court erred in giving a supplemental jury instruction which indicated that a felon could not possess a firearm ""at any time."" We upheld the conviction even though we concluded that the district court should have told the jury to decide whether Stuckey possessed a firearm at a time ""reasonably near"" the date alleged in the indictment. In doing so, we analyzed Stuckey's argument under the variance doctrine, and declined to consider whether the instruction amounted to a constructive amendment of the indictment. United States v. Stuckey, 220 F.3d 976, 979-83 (8th Cir. 2000). We also remanded for resentencing, because we held that Stuckey's prior military drug convictions, which had been used to increase his sentence, did not qualify as ""serious drug offenses"" for purposes of the armed career offender enhancement under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). See id. at 984-86. In this second appeal, Stuckey does not challenge any issues related to his resentencing hearing. Instead, he again challenges his conviction by (1) arguing for the first time that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional, and (2) renewing the jury-instruction challenge he made in his first appeal, claiming we clearly erred by failing to consider whether the supplemental instruction amounted to a constructive amendment of the indictment.