Dale Michael Lucas was convicted by a jury of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking. The district court sentenced him to 360 months in prison. Lucas appeals, arguing that the court improperly admitted irrelevant evidence of other criminal conduct and wrongly determined he was a career offender because his previous OWI conviction was classified as a crime of violence. The case arose from a high-speed chase on December 2, 2003, where Officer Jess Bernhard pursued a vehicle believed to be driven by Robert Bark. After losing sight of the car, Bernhard discovered it abandoned with evidence linking Lucas to the vehicle, including a digital scale and a loaded handgun found nearby. Lucas was later arrested with a backpack containing anhydrous ammonia, linking him further to methamphetamine manufacturing. At trial, witnesses identified various personal items belonging to Lucas that were found in or around the car, reinforcing the prosecution's case. The appeal was ultimately affirmed.
Officers discovered various items inside Lucas's car, including .22 caliber shells, methamphetamine, pseudoephedrine, drug paraphernalia, and other substances and equipment associated with methamphetamine production. Lucas pled guilty to possession of drug paraphernalia related to a Wisconsin arrest. The government presented evidence of Lucas's prior criminal activities beyond the December 2, 2003 incident, including testimony regarding a 2001 drug conviction, his drug activities in the summer of 2003, and a November 2003 incident involving methamphetamine precursors. Lucas objected to this testimony as irrelevant and inadmissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 404(b), which restrict the use of evidence of other crimes to prove character. The district court overruled these objections, leading to a guilty verdict on all counts. At sentencing, the court classified Lucas as a career offender based on a prior OWI conviction, resulting in a Guidelines range of 360 months to life. Lucas was sentenced to a total of 360 months imprisonment on multiple counts. The district court's decision to admit evidence of other crimes was reviewed for abuse of discretion, with the court determining that such evidence was relevant to Lucas's knowledge and intent regarding the charges.
Evidence of prior drug activity and firearm possession is admissible in drug prosecution cases to establish a defendant's intent or motive. Lucas's previous conviction for manufacturing methamphetamine, his activities leading up to the current offenses, and his possession of a firearm were closely related to the charges against him. The evidence showed he was convicted of methamphetamine manufacturing two years prior, was actively cooking methamphetamine in the months before the current offenses, and was arrested with anhydrous ammonia shortly after the instant offense. This evidence was sufficiently similar to the current charges, supporting an inference of criminal intent.
To assess the admissibility of prior acts under Rule 404(b), a reasonableness standard is applied, considering the context and timing of the acts; there is no fixed time limit for relevance. The court found that the evidence met the preponderance standard and that its probative value was not significantly outweighed by any prejudicial effects. The district court provided a limiting instruction to mitigate potential unfair prejudice, which Lucas contested, arguing it was necessary to establish witness credibility related to Knospe's testimony. However, the court found minimal connection between Lucas's past conduct and Knospe’s credibility, affirming that the evidence was crucial for demonstrating Lucas's intent and knowledge regarding the current charges. The district court's decision to admit the evidence was deemed appropriate and within its discretion.
Lucas challenged the district court's classification of his second Iowa OWI conviction as a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. 4B1.1, arguing it was erroneous given Eighth Circuit precedent. He specifically sought to overturn the en banc decision in United States v. McCall, which classified a felony DUI as a "violent felony" under 18 U.S.C. 924(c) due to its potential for serious physical injury. Both parties acknowledged that Lucas's OWI conviction, carrying a maximum penalty of two years, qualified as a felony under the Guidelines, despite its classification as an aggravated misdemeanor in Iowa. The court clarified that a three-judge panel cannot overrule en banc decisions or previous panel opinions; only the en banc court has that authority. Consequently, the court affirmed the district court's ruling that Lucas’s OWI conviction was indeed a crime of violence, upholding the lower court's judgment.
