United States of America v. Terrance Dion Rush

20-1785Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit30 nov. 2020

Texte intégral

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 19-2892
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Terrance Dion Rush
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
____________
Submitted: November 17, 2020
Filed: November 20, 2020
[Unpublished]
____________
Before ERICKSON, WOLLMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Terrence Rush appeals after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense and to being
a felon in possession of a firearm, and the district court1 imposed sentence. He
1The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.

-- 1 of 2 --

contends that there was insufficient evidence supporting his guilty plea to being a
felon in possession of a firearm. He also challenges his sentence and asserts that he
received ineffective assistance of counsel.
We conclude that there was a sufficient factual basis for Rush’s guilty plea to
the felon-in-possession charge. See United States v. Christenson, 653 F.3d 697, 700
(8th Cir. 2011) (reviewing challenge to unobjected-to factual basis for guilty plea for
plain error); United States v. Garcia-Hernandez, 803 F.3d 994, 997 (8th Cir. 2015)
(mens rea requirement does not apply to interstate-commerce element of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)); see also Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191, 2196 (2019)
(presumption in favor of scienter requirement does not apply to jurisdictional
elements). In addition, we find no merit to Rush’s sentencing challenge, and we
decline to address any claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in this direct appeal.
See United States v. Hernandez, 281 F.3d 746, 749 (8th Cir. 2002) (in general,
ineffective-assistance claim is not cognizable on direct appeal; such claim is properly
raised in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 action). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.