Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-15-11270/USCOURTS-ca11-15-11270-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Matthew William McLean
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 15-11270

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 8:14-cr-00388-MSS-AEP-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MATTHEW WILLIAM MCLEAN, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(October 25, 2016)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JORDAN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Matthew McLean appeals his sentence to a term of supervised release for 

life for committing a felony sex offense while required to register as a sex 

USCA11 Case: 15-11270 Date Filed: 10/25/2016 Page: 1 of 3
2

offender. 18 U.S.C. § 2260A. The district court ordered that McLean’s term of 

supervised release run concurrently with a sentence to supervised release for life 

for attempting to transport a minor with the intent to engage in a sexual activity, id.

§ 2423(e). McLean argues, for the first time, that his registration offense was a 

Class C felony, see id. §§ 2260A, 3559(a), for which he faced a maximum 

statutory penalty of three years of supervised release, see id. § 3583(b)(2). We 

affirm.

Even if the district court erred by imposing a term of supervised release for 

life for McLean’s registration offense, that error did not warrant relief under the 

plain error rule. The error did not affect McLean’s substantial rights because his

term of supervised release remained the same regardless of the error. See United 

States v. Cartwright, 413 F.3d 1295, 1300–01 (11th Cir. 2005) (“[P]lain error

affects . . . substantial rights . . . [only if] the error actually did make a difference.”

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). McLean concedes that the district 

court committed no error in sentencing him to a term of supervised release for life 

for his offense under section 2423(e). McLean argues that he could face “up to two 

years [of imprisonment] . . . [s]hould” the district court revoke his supervised 

release, but “where the effect of an error on the result in the district court is 

uncertain or indeterminate—where we would have to speculate—the appellant has 

not met his burden of showing . . . that his substantial rights have been affected,”

USCA11 Case: 15-11270 Date Filed: 10/25/2016 Page: 2 of 3
3

United States v. Rodriguez, 398 F.3d 1291, 1301 (11th Cir. 2005).

We AFFIRM McLean’s sentence.

USCA11 Case: 15-11270 Date Filed: 10/25/2016 Page: 3 of 3