United States v. Kevin Loren Daniels -Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
Kevin Loren Daniels appealed his robbery, firearm, and sentencing convictions, arguing Miranda, right-to-counsel, evidentiary, instructional, and Guidelines errors. The Sixth Circuit rejected every claim and AFFIRMED his convictions and 181-month sentence, while noting (and adhering to) its broader interpretation of the §2B3.1(b)(4)(B) physical-restraint enhancement that conflicts with the Second Circuit’s narrower view.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether moving victims at gunpoint during a robbery constitutes being "physically restrained" for purposes of the two-level enhancement in U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(4)(B).
Circuit Positions
Broad interpretation – brandishing a weapon and forcing victims to move from one location to another qualifies as ‘physically restrained.’
Narrow interpretation – §2B3.1(b)(4)(B) applies only when victims are physically bound, confined, or subjected to direct contact; compelled movement alone is insufficient.
Conflict Summary
The Sixth Circuit treats a victim’s compelled movement at gunpoint as a forcible restraint triggering the §2B3.1(b)(4)(B) enhancement, even without tying, locking, or direct physical contact. The Second Circuit requires actual physical contact or confinement (e.g., tying, binding, locking) and does not apply the enhancement when victims are only ordered to move.