United States v. Jeffrey Bradley

── United States v. Jeffrey Bradley ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Date: May 14, 2026 Category: General United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 25-1310 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jeffrey Alan Bradley Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________ Submitted: April 13, 2026 Filed: May 14, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Jeffrey Alan Bradley pled guilty to receipt of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(2)(A) and 2252A(b)(1). The district court1 sentenced him 1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. to 120 months in prison. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. I. Bradley challenges the court’s application of a 2-level sentencing enhancement for resisting arrest. This court reviews “the district court’s findings of fact for clear error.” United States v. Burling, 420 F.3d 745, 749 (8th Cir. 2005). “A finding is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v. Nilsen, 18 F.4th 587, 589 (8th Cir. 2021). At the sentencing hearing, officers testified that before his arrest, Bradley’s wife told them that he was left-handed and would be carrying a firearm on his left side. Officers followed Bradley to a grocery store. Approaching him, one said, “Police. Put your arms behind your back.” Two officers attempted to handcuff him. He “began to resist us by pulling away, by fighting with us.” Several more officers joined. They handcuffed his right hand but were “unable to gain control of his left hand.” “He was still fighting, twisting, trying to pull his arm away from us as we were trying to get him in custody.” He kept reaching for his left pocket. It took officers about a minute to get him handcuffed. They then saw the loaded firearm. One officer said, “Yep, got a pistol right here. Nice try reaching for it.” Another explained the arrest to his sergeant: “The defendant reached for the gun, he had a little dagger, and he fought the whole way.” They also found extra ammunition, two knives, and a suicide note on Bradley. Bradley argues the officers misinterpreted his struggle with law enforcement based on a confirmation bias stemming from his wife’s comment that he was carrying. He also claims he did not know it was law enforcement grabbing him. Finally, he contends he was pulling his arm forward, but not toward the gun in his pocket. -2- The district court rejected these arguments, finding Bradley resisted arrest: Part of the offense conduct also involves the defendant’s resistance of arrest. And I do find that to be highly aggravating here. First of all, I—I observed the video myself, without any knowledge that law enforcement officers had going into this the defendant was already armed. From watching the defendant’s resistance and the discovery of a firearm on his—in his left pocket, I drew a logical conclusion that the defendant was resisting arrest and attempting to reach for his firearm. So unlike the law enforcement officers, who