Man who rammed Hoover Dam officer’s vehicle loses court appeal

By Steve Kanigher

Thursday, Aug. 11, 2011 | 4:23 p.m.

A man sentenced to 15 years in federal prison after ramming a stolen sport utility vehicle into another vehicle occupied by a Hoover Dam police officer lost an appeal in a decision Thursday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Joel Parker began the morning of Feb. 6, 2006, by invading a Clark County residence, committing burglary, robbery and grand larceny and fleeing the scene in a blue SUV. According to court records, he then headed toward Hoover Dam, where he drove past a security checkpoint without stopping and went speeding down the wrong side of the road.

Hoover Dam Officer Jamie Quiesenberry pursued Parker with sirens and lights. The officer then got out of his vehicle, thinking Parker was trapped in a restricted area with security barriers. But when he ordered Parker out of the vehicle, Parker threw the SUV into reverse toward Quiesenberry. The officer jumped into his own vehicle for cover but Parker rammed it, injuring the officer and pinning him between the two vehicles. Parker then fled the scene, only to be stopped later by police after running over a spike strip used to puncture his tires.

Parker was tried separately in state District Court for the home invasion incident, receiving a minimum 10-year sentence. In the federal case before U.S. District Judge Philip Pro in Las Vegas, a jury found him guilty of two counts of assaulting, resisting or impeding certain officers or employees. Parker's 15-year federal sentence, handed down by Pro in October, was to run consecutively with the state sentence, with credit for time served.

Parker appealed the federal conviction on grounds that the federal court should not have considered the home invasion incident while ruling on the Hoover Dam confrontation. But the Circuit Court ruled that the home invasion was relevant in the federal case in showing that "Parker's behavior was no reckless accident."

The Circuit Court also rejected Parker's argument that a car used to flee cannot be a dangerous or deadly weapon, saying such logic was "simply wrong." Parker had argued that he intended only to flee and didn't intend to use force.

But the Circuit Court wrote that the jury couldn't have found Parker guilty unless it had determined that he used a deadly or dangerous weapon.

"Because Parker remained in his vehicle during his entire confrontation with Quiesenberry, any force Parker used during that encounter had to involve use of a deadly or dangerous weapon," the Circuit Court wrote.