2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-1-2010 

# U SA v . R a shon Alexande r P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 09-2357

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . R ashon Alex ande r " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1051. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/1051NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

____________ N o. 09- 2357

____________ UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. R A S H O N A L E X A N D E R , a/k/ a B oog R ash o n A lexa n d er, A ppel l ant

____________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . N o. 06- cr - 00891) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e K athar i ne S. H ay den

____________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J ul y1, 2010 B e f o re : S L O V IT E R , B A R R Y a n d H A R D IM A N , C i r cui tJudges .

( Fi l ed: J ul y1, 2010)

____________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

____________A l exande rcl ai m s t he D i s t r i ctC our terr ed bynotus i ng the 2006 ver s i on of the 1 Gu i d e l i n e s , wh i c h wa s c u r r e n ta tt h e t i me o f h i s o f f e n s e . Be c a u s e we r e a c h th e s a me concl us i on r egar dl es s of w hi ch ver s i on of the G ui del i nes i s us ed, w e w i l l as s um e, ar guendo , t hatA l exande ri s corr ecti n t hi s r egar d. 2 H A R D IM A N , C i r cui tJudge . Pur s uantt o a w r i t t en agr eement , R as hon A l exande rpl eade d gui l t yt o one countof p o s s e s s i n g a f

i r e a r m a f t e rb e i n g c o n v i c t e d o f

a f e l o n y , i n v i o l a t i o n o f

1 8 U. S . C. § 9 2 2 (g )(1 ), an d w a s s e n ten c e d to 8 4 m o n th s im p riso n m e n t. A lex a n d e r a p p e a ls h is ju d g m e n t o f

se n ten c e , co n ten d in g th a t th e D istric t C o u rt in c o rre c tlyc o m p u ted h is c rim in a l h isto ryc a teg o rya n d im p o se d a p ro c e d u ra llya n d su b sta n tiv e lyu n re a so n a b le s e n t e n c e . W e wi l l a f

f i r m. I. B eca us e w e w r i t e fort he part i es , w e r ecountonl ythe es s ent i al fac t s and pr ocedur al h i s t o r y. C ons i s t entw i t h t he U ni t ed St at es Sent enci ng G ui del i nes ( U SSG ) , the D i s t r i ct C o u rtca lculated A lexa n d er’s o ff en se lev el as 2 1 an d h is cri m inal h ist o ryca tego ryas V I, wh i c h y i e l d e d a n a d v i s o r yGu i d e l i n e s r a n g e o f 7 7 t o 9 6 mo n t h s i mp r i s o n me n t . On 1 app eal , A l exan der cl ai m s hi s cr i m i nal hi st orycat ego rycal culat i on w as i nco rr ectbecau se t he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d notgr oup t ogetherhi s thr ee pr i ors ent ence s forpos s es s i ng a contr ol l ed dange r ous s ubs t ance w i t hi n 1000 fee tof s chool pr oper t y , i n vi ol at i on of N ew3

Jer seyl aw . T he D i stri ctC ou rtassi gn ed thr ee cri m i nal hi st orypo i nts t o each of these off enses, w hich accou nted for ni ne o f A l exan der’ s 17 cri m i nal hi st orypo i nts . A c c o r d i n g t o U S S G § 4 A 1 . 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) , i n c o m p u t i n g a d e f e n d a n t ’ s c r i m i n a l h i s t o r y, “[p] r i ors ent ence s i m pos ed i n r el at ed ca s es ar e t o be tr eat ed as one s ent ence . ” A ppl i cat i on N o te 3 to § 4 A 1 . 2 elab o rates f u rth er: Pr i ors ent ence s ar e notcons i der ed r el at ed i f theyw er e foroffe ns es that w er e s epar at ed byan i nt erveni ng arr es t( i . e. , the def endanti s arr es t ed for t he fi r s toffe ns e pr i ort o comm i t t i ng the s econd of fens e) . O t herw i s e, pr i or s e n t e n c e s a r e c o n s i d e r e d r e l a t e d i f th e yr e s u l t e d f

r o m o f f e n s e s th a t( A) o c c u r r e d o n t h e s a me o c c a s i o n , ( B) we r e p a r to f a s i n g l e c o mmo n s c h e me orpl an, or( C ) w er e cons ol i dat ed fortr i al ors ent enci ng. I n s uppor tof hi s ar gum entt hathi s thr ee pos s es s i on s ent ence s s houl d have be en gr ouped as one, A l exande rnot es t hathe r ece i ved a s i ngl e s ent ence foral l thr ee of fens es . H ad the D istri ct C o u rtg rou p ed A lexa n d er’s o ff en ses, i t w o u ld h av e re d u ce d h is cri m inal h ist o ry s cor e t o 11, and hi s cr i m i nal hi s t or ycat egoryt o V , w hi ch w oul d have r es ul t ed i n an a d v i s o r ys e n t e n c i n g r a n g e o f 7 0 t o 8 7 mo n t h s . We r e v i e w de novo the D istri ct C o u rt ’s in te rp re ta tio n s o f

th e S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s , U ni t ed Stat es v. P oj i l enko , 416 F. 3d 243, 2 4 6 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ), b u t r ev iew the D istri ct C o u rt ’s find ing s o f f ac t on lyfo r clear e rror, U nited S tates v. W

ise , 5 1 5 F . 3 d 2 0 7 , 2 1 7 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 8 ). A l exande r ’ s ar gum entfai l s beca us e, as the D i s t r i ctC our tfound, hi s thr ee po sses si on off

enses w ere s eparat ed b yi nterven i ng arr est s. A l exan der com m i t t ed the fi rs t pos s es s i on offe ns e on J anuary4, 2000, and w as arr es t ed thats ame day . H e w as r el eas ed o n b o n d , b u t c o m m itte d th e s a m e o f f e n s e th e n e x t d a y , J a n u a ry 5 , a n d w a s re -a rr e s te d .4

A f te r b e in g re le a s e d a s e c o n d tim e , h e c o m m itte d th e th ir d o f f e n s e o n M a rc h 2 1 , 2 0 0 0 . T hus A l exande rpl ai nl yw as “arr es t ed forthe fi r s toffe ns e pr i ort o comm i t t i ng the s econd offe ns e, ” and f

ort he s econd of

fens e bef or e comm i t t i ng the thi r d. U nderA ppl i cat i on N ot e 3, t he D i s t r i ctC our tw as notperm i t t ed t o t r eatthes e cons ol i dat ed s ent ence s as

“ re late d .” A c c o rd in g ly , the D istric t C o u rt c o m m itt e d n o e rro r w h e n it d e c id e d n o t to group t hese t hree offe nses. II. A lex a n d e r a lso c laim s h is s e n ten c e w a s p ro c e d u ra llya n d su b sta n tiv e ly u n re a so n a b le, a rg u in g th a t th e D istric t C o u rt e rre d b y : (1 ) f a ili n g to c o n sid e r h is m i t i gat i ng ci r cumst ance s and the fa ct or s enumer at ed i n 18 U . S. C . § 3553( a) ; and ( 2) r efus i ng t o r educe hi s s ent ence t o r efl ectthos e ci r cumst ance s and fa ct or s . A s the G overnm entpoi nt s out , how ever , A l exande ri s pr ecl uded fr om r ai s i ng thes e ar gum ent s by t he appe l l at e w ai veri n hi s pl ea a gr eement . W e have pr evi ous l ys t at ed: W e w i l l decl i ne t o exer ci s e ourj ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew the mer i t s of [a defe ndant ’ s ] appea l i f w e conc l ude ( 1) thatthe i s s ues he pur s ues on appea l fal l w i t hi n t he s cope of

hi s appel l at e w ai verand ( 2) thathe know i ngl yand vol unt ar i l yagr eed t o t he appe l l at e w ai ver , unl es s ( 3) enfor ci ng the w ai ver w oul d w or k a mi s carr i age of j us t i ce. U nited S tates v. C orso , 549 F. 3d 921, 927 ( 3d C i r . 2008) . H er e, A l exande r“agr ee[ d] t hat a s ent ence w i t hi n t he G ui del i nes r ange thatr es ul t s fr om the agr eed t ot al G ui del i nes offe ns e l evel of 21 i s r eas onabl e, ” and “ vol unt ar i l yw ai ve[d] . . . the r i ghtt o fi l e any appea l . . . w hi ch cha l l enges t he s ent ence i m pos ed bythe s ent enci ng courti f thats ent enceT h e p lea a g ree m en t do es n o t bar A lexa n d er’s ch all en g e to th e D istri ct C o u rt ’s 2 cal cul at i on of hi s cr i m i nal hi s t or ycat egory , beca us e both par t i es expr es s l yr es erved the r i ghtt o appea l t hatdet erm i nat i on. T he pl ea a gr eementi s cl ear , how ever , thatonce A lex a n d e r’s c rim in a l h isto ryc a teg o ryis d e ter m in e d , h e m a yn o t ap p e a l h is s e n ten c e if it fal l s w i t hi n t he r ange di ct at ed byt hatcat egoryand an of fens e l evel of 21. T he D i s t r i ct C our tful l yexpl ai ned thi s t o A l exande rathi s pl ea he ar i ng. 5 fal l s w i t hi n orbel ow t he G ui del i nes r ange thatr es ul t s fr om the agr eed t ot al G ui del i nes offe ns e l evel of 21. ” B eca us e the D i s t r i ctC our tfound thatA l exande r ’ s offe ns e l evel 2 w as 21 and s ent ence d hi m w i t hi n t he r es ul t i ng G ui del i nes r ange, A l exande r ’ s at t ack on t he r eas onabl enes s of thats ent ence fal l s s quar el yw i t hi n t he appe l l at e w ai ver . A l exande r a ttem p ts n e ith e r to im p u g n th e v o lu n tar in e ss o f h is w a iv e r n o r to a rg u e th a t it s enfo rcem ent w ou l d resul ti n a m i scarri age o f j ust i ce. A ccordi ng l y , w e w i l l no texerci se ju risd ictio n o v e r th is a sp e c t o f A lex a n d e r’s a p p e a l. Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l aff i r m A l exande r ’ s j udgm entof s ent ence .