## Facts

- Darnell Boyce, a previously convicted felon with multiple felony convictions, was prosecuted for possessing a firearm and ammunition.
- On March 27, 2010, after an altercation at Sarah Portis’s residence, Portis called 911 stating Boyce had “just hit her” and that a gun was involved.
- During the call, Portis stated she had seen the gun and said she was “positive,” after the operator warned about consequences of lying.
- Officers arrived within minutes, determined Boyce was not inside, and spoke with Portis; an officer described her as emotional and as if she had just been running from a fight.
- While officers completed a domestic battery report, Boyce returned outside calling for Portis, fled when asked to approach, and was chased.
- An officer testified he saw Boyce retrieve a handgun from his midsection and throw it into a yard.
- Police recovered a .357 Magnum handgun from the area and found matching ammunition in Boyce’s pocket.
- Boyce relied on an Illinois Department of Corrections form letter stating his “civil rights” were restored after a state unlawful-use-of-a-weapon conviction, arguing it removed his federal firearms disability and barred ACCA use of prior convictions.

## Issues

1. Whether Boyce’s “civil rights restored” letter prevented the government from treating him as a felon under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and from applying ACCA, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e).
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by admitting Portis’s 911 statements (including that Boyce had a gun) under the hearsay exceptions for excited utterances or present sense impressions.  
3. Whether, after *Alleyne v. United States*, ACCA’s mandatory-minimum enhancement could be imposed based on prior convictions found by the judge rather than a jury.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed Boyce’s convictions and 210-month sentence.
- The court held Boyce’s civil rights had not been restored for all relevant felony convictions, so he remained a prohibited person under § 922(g)(1) and eligible for ACCA.
- The court held the 911 call statements were properly admitted, primarily as excited utterances, and the district court did not abuse its discretion.
- The court held *Alleyne* did not require jury findings on the existence of prior convictions; *Almendarez-Torres* remained controlling for the prior-conviction exception.

## Legal Principles

- Under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20), a state restoration of civil rights negates a conviction for federal firearms-disability purposes only to the extent it restores rights for the relevant conviction(s); partial restoration as to one conviction does not negate other felony convictions for § 922(g)(1) or ACCA.
- A district court’s decision to admit evidence under Fed. R. Evid. 803 hearsay exceptions is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- A statement qualifies as an excited utterance under Fed. R. Evid. 803(2) when it relates to a startling event and is made while the declarant remains under the stress caused by that event, supporting reliability.
- *Alleyne* requires jury findings for facts increasing mandatory minimums, but not for the fact of prior convictions; sentencing judges may find prior convictions for ACCA under the continuing *Almendarez-Torres* exception.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit upheld Boyce’s felon-in-possession convictions and ACCA sentence, ruling that an Illinois civil-rights restoration letter tied to a single conviction did not eliminate his federal felon status and that the victim’s 911 statements were admissible as excited utterances; the ACCA enhancement could be based on judge-found prior convictions.


United States v. Boyce, 742 F.3d 792 (7th Cir. 2014)