United States of America v. Joshua Lee

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-1629
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Joshua Lee
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: April 18, 2025
Filed: August 18, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before ERICKSON, ARNOLD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
After Joshua Lee pleaded guilty to illegally possessing a firearm, see 18
U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (prohibiting possession by felons), he received an enhancement
for “us[ing] or possess[ing] [it] in connection with the commission . . . of another
offense.” U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(1). Although he challenges the use of hearsay
statements in making the finding, any error was harmless.

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
The district court1 found that the other offense in this case was aggravated
assault. See id. § 2A2.2 (setting the base level and enhancements for that offense);
id. § 2K2.1 cmt. n.14(C) (defining “[a]nother offense” to include “any federal, state,
or local offense . . . regardless of whether a criminal charge was brought”). Lee did
it twice: once by “attempting to strangle” his girlfriend and then a second time by
shooting her. Id. § 2A2.2 cmt. n.1. Even if the district court abused its discretion
by relying on hearsay testimony about the shooting, there was no dispute at
sentencing that he tried to strangle her just moments before. See United States v.
Regans, 125 F.3d 685, 686 (8th Cir. 1997) (applying the cross-reference when the
unlawful possession had “the potential of facilitating” the other offense (quoting
Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223, 238 (1993))). It follows that any error was
harmless because the undisputed evidence triggered the aggravated-assault cross-
reference, regardless of whether he shot her too. See United States v. McGrew, 846
F.3d 277, 280 (8th Cir. 2017) (explaining that an error is harmless if it “did not
substantially influence the outcome of the sentencing proceeding” (citation
omitted)). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court.
______________________________
1 The Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri.

-- 2 of 2 --