# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 3- 32 06

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.
Pri nc et on C. Bak er
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e So ut he rn Dis tri ctof I owa - Co un ci l Bl uf fs

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Marc h 2 4, 2 01 4 Fil ed : M arch 27 , 20 14 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re BYE, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Pri nc et on Bak er dir ect ly ap pe al s t he sen te nc e th atth e d is tri ctco ur t im po se d 1 aft er Bak er pl ead ed gu il ty to es cap in g fro m fed eral cu st od y
. His co un se l ha s m ov ed

The Hon or ab le James E. Grit zn er, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t 1 fo r th e So ut he rn Dis tri ctof I owa
.t o w i th dr aw an d ha s fil ed a br ie f un de r Ander s v. Ca li fo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 73 8 (1 96 7 ) , a r g u i ng th at th e se nt en ce is su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le be cau se it was im po se d

co ns ecu ti ve ly to an un di sc ha rg edst at e se nt en ce.

We co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n. Se e U n i t e d St at es v. Feems te r , 57 2 F.3 d 45 5, 46 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (en ba nc ) (ap pe ll at e rev ie w of

se nt en ci ng de ci si on ). The co ur t de te rm in ed th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s ran ge ; he ard th e pa rti es ’ arg um en ts fo r an d ag ai ns t va ry in g fro m U.S.S.G. § 5G1 .3( b ) , w h i c h

reco m m en de d co nc ur ren t se nt en ci ng ; di sc us se d th e 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) fact or s; an d

care fu ll y ex pl ai ne d th e de ci si on to ru n th e fed eral se nt en ce co ns ecu ti ve ly to th e st at e
se nt en ce in th e pa rti cu la r ci rcu m st an ces of Bak er’s cas e. Se e 18 U.S

. C

. § 35 84 (b ) (d ire ct in g co ur t to co ns id er § 35 53 (a) fact or s in de te rm in in g whe th er se nt en ce sh ou ld

ru n co ns ecu ti ve ly to or co nc ur ren tl y wit h an ot he r se nt en ce); Uni te d St at es v. Ca rt er , 65 2 F.3 d 89 4, 89 6- 97 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (aff irming se nt en ce whe re co ur t de te rm in ed

va ria nc e fro m Gui de li ne s was ap pr op ria te in li gh t of § 35 53 (a) fact or s)

. In ad di ti on , we ha ve in de pe nd en tl y rev ie wed th e reco rd in acco rd an ce wit h Pen so n v. Ohi o , 48 8 U.S. 75 , 80 (1 98 8) , an d ha ve fo un d no no nf riv ol ou s is su es
. Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm
.
As fo r c o u n s e l’s m ot io n to wit hd raw, we co nc lu de th at al lo win g co un se l to

w i t hd raw at th is ti m e wou ld no t be co ns is te nt wit h th e Eig ht h Ci rcu it ’s 19 9 4 Am en dm en t to Part V of th e Pl an to Im pl em en t The C r i mi n a l J u s ti ce Act of 19 64

. W e th eref or e de ny co un se l’s m ot io n to wit hd raw as pr em at ur e, wit ho ut pr ejud ic e to
co un se l re fil in g t he m ot io n u po n fu lfi ll in g t he du ti es set for th in th e Am en dm en t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-