FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT NOVEMB ER 3, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 13050 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D
. C
. D o c k e tN o . 0 1
- 0 0 1 1 2
- T P
- K MM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f
- A p p e lle e , v ersu s M A R V I N B A P T I S T E , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 3, 2006) B efo re B IR C H , H U L L an d M A R C U S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: M arvi n B apt i st e app ea l s hi s ni ne-m on th te rm of i ncar ce ra t i on , w hi ch w as i m pos e d upon r e voc a t i on of hi s s upe r vi s e d rel ease aft e rhe vi ol a t e d f ourc ondi t i ons
o f h is s u p e r v is e d r e le a s e . O n a p p e a l, B ap tis te a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t f a ile d to2

consi der the fa ct ors i n 1 8 U
. S
. C
. § 3 55 3(a) be fo re i m po si ng hi s s ent ence , w hi ch
w as w i thi n the advi sory G ui del i nes r ang e th at he fa ce d, and t hathi s s ent ence w as
u n r e a s o n a b le . A f

te rc a r e f u l r e v ie w , w e a f

f ir m . T h e r e le v a n t f

a c ts a r e s tr a ig h tf

o rw a r d
. I n 1 9 9 9 , B ap tis te p le d g u ilty to
c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e c oc a i ne ba s e , i n v i o l a t i on of 21 U .S .C . § 8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) , a n d w a s s e n te n c e d to a 2 7
- m o n th te r m o f im p r is o n m e n t, fol l ow ed by fi ve ye ar s’ supervi se d rel ea se . A ft erse rvi ng hi s pri son senten ce, Bap t i s t e ’ s s u p e r v i s e d r e l e a s e w a s r e v o k e d f o rth e f i r s tt i me i n 2 0 0 4 , a tw h i c h t i me he w a s s e nt e nc e d t o a f our - m onth t e r m of

i nc a r c e r a t i on f

ol l ow e d by a t e r m of

56
m o n th s ’ s u p e r v is e d r e le a s e . T he r e a f t e r , on A p ri l 5, 2006, w hi c h w a s a f t e rB apt i s t e c om pl e t e d hi s s e c ond pri son t erm and agai n w as o n su p ervi se d rel ea se , B apt i st e’ s probat i on offi ce r f i l ed
a “P e titio n f

o ra W a rr a n t ” b a s e d o n th e f o llo w in g f

a c ts . O n M a r c h 1 2 , 2 0 0 6 , in O s c e ol a C ounty , F l or i da , B apt i s t e c om m i t t ed the of f e ns e s of gi vi ng a f

a l s e na m e or f a ls e id e n tif

ic a tio n a f

t e rh e w a s a rr e s te d o rd e ta in e d , in v io la tio n o f F la . S ta t. § 9 0 1 .3 6 , a n d d r iv in g w h ile h is lic e n s e w a s s u s p e n d e d , in v io la tio n o f F l a . T r a f

f ic L a w 322. 34. A f

t e rhi s a rr e s t , B apt i s t e di d notnot i f y hi s pr oba t i on of

f i c e r , a s the t e r m s of hi s s upe r vi s e d r e l e a s e r e qui r e d hi m t o do. M or e ove r , B apt i s t e h ad l ef tthe ju d ic ia l d is tr ic t, a s e v id e n c e d b y th e tr a f f ic s to p in O s c e o la C o u n ty , w h ic h is n o t in3

th e S o u th er n D istrict o f F lo ri d a, w ith o u t first se cu rin g th e p ro b atio n o ff icer ’s pe r m i s s i on. H e s ubs e que nt l y l i e d t o th e p ro b at i on of f i c e ri n c onne c t i on w i th the M ar ch 12 , 20 06 i nci dent
. T hu s, the prob at i on offi cer stat ed thatB apt i st e had
v io la te d th e f

o llo w in g c o n d itio n s o f h is s u p e r v is e d r e le a s e : ( 1 ) f a ilu r e t o r e f

r a in f r om a vi ol a t i on of

the l a w ; ( 2) f

a i l ur e t o not i f

y hi s pr oba t i on of

f i c e rw i thi n 72 hour s a f t e rbe i ng a rr e s t e d orque s t i one d by a l a w e nf or c e m e ntof

f i c e r ; ( 3) l e a vi ng the j udi c i a l di s tr i c tw i thoutf i r s ts e c ur i ng pe r m i s s i on of the pr oba t i on of

f i c e r ; a nd ( 4 ) f a ilu r e to a n s w e rtru th f

u lly a ll in q u ir e s b y th e p r o b a tio n o f f ic e r . A f t e rgr a nt i ng the P e t i t i o n fo r a W a rr a nt , the di s tr i c tc our tc onduc t e d a
s upe r vi s e d- r e l e a s e r e voc a t i on he a r i ng, a tw hi c h B apt i s t e di d notc ont est a ny of the
v io la t i o n s a lle g e d in th e P e titio n . H o w e v e r , h e d id p r e s e n t m itig a tin g e v id e n c e in supp ort o f a l ow erse nt ence , i ncl ud i ng the t es t i m on y of hi s f ather w ho t es t i fi ed that B apt i s t e w a s w i th hi m a ta bi r thda y pa r ty the ev en i n g be f or e the a rr e s ta nd ha d, the r e f or e , notbe e n outof

the di s tr i c tf

orthe e nt i r e w eek en d
. R odne y J a c ks on t es t i fi ed t ha the w a s w i th Bapt i s t e on the da y of the of f e ns e . J a c ks on s t a t e d tha t B apt i st e had cal l ed hi m i n the m orni ng and i nd i ca ted th at there w as an em er gency req u i ri n g h i m (B ap t i st e) t o g o p i ck u p h is b r o th er. Jack so n t est i fi ed th atb ecau se he w a s s t i l l unde rthe i nf l ue nc e fro m b ei n g outthe pr i ore ve ni ng, B apt i s t e dr ove the ve hi c l e . B apt i s t e ’ s br othe r , N a tha n B apt i s t e , t e s t i f i e d tha ton the day of

the4

i nci dent , he ca l l ed h is m o th ert o com e a nd pi ck hi m up . A cc ordi ng t o N athan B a p tis te, h i s m o th er w as si ck at th e t i m e o f th e i n ci d en t an d u l t i m at el y h ad to
u n d e r g o a d o u b le k id n e y tr a n s p la n t s te m m in g f r o m h e rilln e s s . F i na l l y , B apt i s t e t e s t i f

i e d on hi s ow n be ha l f

. H e s a i d tha t h e w en t t o pi c k up hi s br othe rbeca us e hi s m othe rw a s una bl e t o go due t o a ki dne y c ondi t i on. B apt i s t e c l a i m e d tha the di d notc a l l hi s pr ob at i on of f i c e rbe c a us e he w a s t i r e d, he ha d ju st h ad an ar gu m entw i th h i s m other abo utpi cki ng up hi s brother, and i thad notoc c urr e d t o hi m a tthe t i m e . H e e xpl ai ne d tha the l i e d a boutthe i nc i de ntt o the p r o b a tio n o f

f i c e rin o r d e rto a v o id g e ttin g in to m o r e tr o u b le b e c a u s e h e f e lt th a t h is lif e h a d b e e n m o v in g in a p o s itiv e d ir e c tio n u p u n til th a t p o in t. A ft er p resen t i n g th i s t est i m o n y, B ap t i st e req u est ed a sen t en ce o f 1 2 0 d ays’ h o u s e arrest an d ask ed th e co u rt t o co n si d er th e m i t i g at i n g fact o rs, i n cl u d in g h is
c u rr e n t jo b a n d f

a m ily s itu a t io n , w h e n m a k in g its d e c is io n . I n a d d itio n to i ndi c a t i ng hi s r e m or s e , B apt i s t e ur ge d the co ur tt o c ons i de rtha the now

“ un ders t ands w hathe’ s gott o l ose” and u rged the courtt o g i ve hi m anot her
c h a n c e . T he di s tr i c tc our tr e s ponde d tha tw hi l e i tw a s i n f a vo r of gi vi ng s e c ond
c h a n c e s , “in [ B ap tis te ’s ] c a s e h e ’s b e e n g iv e n p le n ty o f c h a n c e s i f y o u lo o k a t h is
c r i m i na l hi s t ory . ” T he c our tthe n f ound tha tB apt i s t e ha d vi ol a t e d the t e r m s a nd5

c ondi t i ons of

hi s s upe r vi s e d r e l e a se an d st a t e d tha ti tha d “ c a r e f ul l y c ons i de r e d the
s ta te m e n ts o f

a ll p a r tie s a n d th e in f o r m a tio n c o n ta in e d in t h e v io la tio n r e p o r t, in c lu d in g C h ap te r7 p o l ic y s ta te m e n ts . . . [ a n d ] d e te r m in e d th a t a s e n te n c e w ith in the gu i del i ne ra ng e i s app ropri at e.” T h e co u rtthen i m po se d a se nt ence of ni nem o n th s ’ im p r is o n m e n t, f o llo w e d b y 4 7 m o n th s ’ s u p e r v is e d r e le a s e . B ap tis te
s ubm i tt e d no obj e c t i ons t o the f or e goi ng s e nt e nc i ng s c he m e . T hi s appe a l f ol l ow e d. B apt i st e a rgues thathi s s ent ence w as un re as on abl e bec ause the di stri ctcourt d id n o t g iv e a d e q u a te w e ig h t to t h e m itig a tin g e v id e n c e h e p r e s e n te d , in c lu d in g h is
o w n t est i m o n y ab o u tw h at h a p p en ed o n th e d ay o f th e su p erv i sed -rel ease vi ol at i on s. W e di sa gree . F r om ourr e vi e w of

the r e c or d, i ti s c l e a rtha tthe di s tr i c tc our ti m pos e d the ni n e - mo n th s e n t e n c e o n l y a f t e r i t h a d h e a r d Bap t i s t e ’ s mi t i g a t i n g t e s t i m ony a nd
c o n si de r e d a r gum e nttha ti m pl i c a t e d the 18 U
. S
. C
. § 3553( a ) f a c t or s , i nc l udi ng

“ the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e a nd the hi s t ory a nd c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s of th e d e f e n d a n t” ; “th e n e e d f

o rth e s e n t e n c e im p o s e d . . . to a f f o r d a d e q u a te d e te rr e n c e to c r im in a l c o n d u c t; a n d th e n e e d f o rth e s e n te n c e “to p r o te c t th e p u b lic fr om further cr i m es of the defe nd ant . ” S ee 18 U
. S
. C
. § 355 3(a) (1), (2)( B )- (D ). T he courtw as no tre qu i re d t o d i sc uss e ac h fac t or as w e h av e sp ec i fi ca l l y hel d that

“ no thi ng i n B oo ker r equi re s the di stri ctcourtt o st at e on th e re cord thati thasAs for B aptiste’s argument, raised for the first time on appe al, that the district cour t did not 1 aff ord suffic ient consideration to the sentence s of other de fenda nts in the underlying of

fense , he has not shown plain error. W e li kewise are unpersuade d by Ba ptiste’s other arguments, which wefind unpersua sive in light of the record. 6 expl i ci t l y c on si dere d eac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) facto rs o r to di sc uss e ac h o f the § 35 53 (a ) f

ac t ors. ” U ni t ed S t at es v. S cott , 42 6 F
. 3d 13 24 , 13 29 (11 th C ir. 200 5). In ad d i t i o n t o h eari n g th e m i t i g at i n g t est i m o n y B ap t i st e p resen t ed , th e co u rtal so
e xpl i c i t l y m e nt i one d the C hapt e r7 pol i c y s t a t e m e nt s a s w e l l a s the gui de l i ne r a nge
w he n i ts t a t e d T he C our tha s c a r e f

ul l y c o n si d ere d the s t a t e m e nt s of a l l pa r t i e s a nd the in fo rm at i on cont ai ned i n the vi ol at i on re po rt , i ncl ud i ng C hapt er7 pol i c y s t a t e m e nt s . T he C our tf i nds the de f

e nda nt h as v i ol a t e d the t e r m s a nd c ondi t i ons of s upe r vi s e d r el ease and he r e by r e voke s the p e r io d o f

s u p e r v is e d r e le a s e . T h e C o u r t h a s d e te r m in e d th a t a se nt ence w i thi n the gu i del i ne ra ng e i s app ropri at e. ( R 2 a t 1 9 ) ; s e e a l s o 1 8 U
. S
. C
. § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ( 4 ) . I n s h o r t, th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a d e q u a te ly
c ons i d ered the § 3553( a ) f a c t or s a nd i m pos e d a r e a s ona bl e s e nt e nc e w i thi n the G ui del i nes r ange. 1 AF F I RME D.