One Gun Too Many: Double-Counting the Same Offense in Iowa

• Author: T.M. Clint Harris
• Position: J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2020; B.S., The University of Iowa, 2004
• Pages: 2329-2357

2329

One Gun Too Many: Double-Counting

the Same Offense in Iowa

T.M. Clint Harris*

ABSTRACT: The average Iowan would be shocked to learn that the

commission of a firearm possession crime in Iowa would expose them to the

risk of being sent to federal prison for a time period 25 percent longer than

that of a citizen of a neighboring state. This Note argues that the Eighth

Circuit’s ruling in United States v. Walker was an erroneous interpretation

of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and that governmental action should be

taken in one of three major arenas—judicial, administrative, or legislative

—to remedy the resulting sentencing disparities. Ultimately, this would be one

step towards returning fairness and justice to similarly situated defendants

in the federal criminal system.

I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 2330

II.THE HISTORY AND IMPACT OF THE SENTENCING

GUIDELINES ................................................................................ 2331

A.THE SENTENCING OF JOHN DOE ............................................. 2331

B.FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES AS A RESPONSE TO

JUDICIAL SENTENCING DISPARITY ........................................... 2333

C.WHAT IS SECTION 2K2.1(B)(6)(B)? ...................................... 2336

D.IOWA WEAPON LAWS: IOWA CODE SECTION 724.4 .................. 2337

E.HOW HAS THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT APPLIED SECTION

2K2.1(B)(6)(B)? .................................................................. 2339

F.FIREARM LAWS AMONGST THE OTHER EIGHTH

CIRCUIT STATES .................................................................... 2344

III.WHY ARE DISPARATE SENTENCING OUTCOMES A

PROBLEM? ................................................................................... 2348

A.THE IMPACT OF DISPARATE SENTENCES ON INDIVIDUALS ......... 2349

B.THE IMPACT OF DISPARATE SENTENCES ON

GOVERNMENT AND CITIZENS .................................................. 2349

*

J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2020; B.S., The University of

Iowa, 2004.

2330 IOWA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 105:2329

IV.WHAT ARE POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM OF

DOUBLE-COUNTING FIREARM POSSESSION CRIMES IN

IOWA? .......................................................................................... 2350

A.ACTION BY THE DISTRICT COURT SENTENCING JUDGE ............. 2351

B.ACTION BY THE SENTENCING COMMISSION ............................. 2352

C.JUDICIAL ACTION BY THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ............................. 2354

D.JUDICIAL ACTION BY THE SUPREME COURT ............................. 2355

E.IOWA LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO AMEND IOWA

CODE SECTION 724.4 ............................................................ 2355

V.CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 2356

I. INTRODUCTION

Why should two people, separated only by state boundaries, who commit

identically unlawful conduct, face vastly different federal prison terms under

the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines? As originally intended, they should not, but

that is what is happening in Iowa in comparison to the rest of the states in the

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. This unequal treatment, which has been

occurring since at least 2014,1 runs counter to the high ideals the Sentencing

Guidelines were intended to promote—fairness and a reduction in disparate

sentences.2

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ own record,3 coupled with the

information collected and analyzed by the U.S. Sentencing Commission

(“Commission”),4 demonstrates a clear discrepancy between defendants

sentenced for firearm possession offenses in Iowa federal courts and those

sentenced elsewhere in the Eighth Circuit’s seven-state jurisdiction. The

underlying reason for this disparate impact is two-pronged: (1) Iowa has a

deadly weapons law that predates the Guidelines, criminalizes a broader range

of conduct, and imposes an accompanying sentence longer than any of the

other six states in the circuit,5 and (2) the Eighth Circuit has narrowly

1. See United States v. Walker, 771 F.3d 449, 451–52 (8th Cir. 2014).

2. See Stephen G. Breyer, The Original U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and Suggestions for a Fairer

Future, 46 HOFSTRA L. REV. 799, 800 (2018) (“Ultimately, the Guidelines were developed because

we wanted . . . greater fairness (I note ‘-er’ not ‘-est’), not perfect fairness, but increased fairness

where people would be treated more alike.”).

3. See cases cited infra note 97.

4. See 28 U.S.C. § 995(a)(12), (14)–(15) (2012) (requiring the Commission to “serv[e] as

a clearinghouse and information center for the collection, preparation, and dissemination of

information on Federal sentencing practices,” to “collect systematically and disseminate

information concerning sentences actually imposed,” and to “publish data concerning the

sentencing process”).

5. IOWA CODE § 724.4(1) (2020). This statute remains essentially unaltered since 1976 .

1976 Iowa Acts 549; see also infra note 104 and accompanying text. The seven states that make up