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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 4- 26 72

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 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.
Ken ne th O. Rand ol ph

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 Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

7, 2 01 5 Fi le d: Jan ua ry

15 , 20 15 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, BYE, and MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Ken ne th Ran do lp h di rect ly ap pe al s aft er im po si ti on of se nt en ce by th e di st ric t

co ur t up on hi s g ui lt y

pl ea t o b ei ng a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm . Cou ns el ha s 1

The Hon or ab le Gary A. Fen ne r, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.m ov ed to wit hd r a w , an d ha s fil ed a br ie f un de r And ers v. Cal ifo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 73 8

(1 96 7) , arg ui ng th at th e se nt en ce im po se d on Ran do lp h, whi ch rep res en ts a va ria nc e ab ov e th e cal cu la te d Gui de li ne s r an ge , is un reas on ab le

. In a su pp le m en ta l br ie f, Ran do lp h ch al le ng es th e vo lu nt ari ne ss of hi s pl ea, arg ue s th at he rece iv ed in effe ct iv e
as si st an ce o f co un se l, an d c on te nd s th at th e co ur t fail ed to pro pe rly con si de r th e 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) fact or s in se nt e n ci ng hi m

. Fo r th e reas on s di sc us se d be lo w, e ach of th es e arg um en ts is un av ai li ng

.

Fi rs t, Ran do lp h’s ch al le ng e to th e vo lu nt ari ne ss of hi s gu il ty pl ea is no t

co gn iz ab le in th is di rect ap pe al , be cau se he di d no t m ov e to wit hd raw hi s pl ea be lo w. See Uni te d St at es v. Um an zo r, 61 7 F.3 d 10 53 , 10 60 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (d efen da nt m ay
no t ch al le ng e vo lu nt ari ne ss of gu il ty pl ea fo r fir st ti m e on di rect ap pe al if he di d no t

m ov e to wit hd raw pl ea in di st ric t co ur t). Seco nd , hi s in effe ct iv e-as si st an ce cl ai m s are
m or e pr op erl y rai se d in pr oc eed in gs un de r 28 U.S.C. § 22 55 , an d we d ecl in e to

co ns id er t ho se cla im s i n t hi s ap pe al . See Uni te d St at es v. McAd or y , 5 01 F.3 d 8 68 , 87 2- 73 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (in effe ct iv e-as si st an ce cl ai m s are or di na ril y de ferr ed to § 22 55 pr oc eed in gs ).

Thi rd , aft er ca refu l re vi ew, se e Uni te d S ta te s v . F eem st er, 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 ), we co nc lu de th at th e s e n t e n c e is no t un reas on ab le

. The di st ric t co ur t’s co m m en ts refl ect an in d i v i d u a li zed as se ss m en t of m ul ti pl e se ct io n 35 53 (a) fact or s; an d in care fu ll y
ex pl ai ni ng it s de ci si on to va ry up ward , th e co ur t co m m en te d on , am on g ot he r th in gs , Ran do lp h’s reci di vi sm , hi s po o r h i s to ry on su pe rv is ed rel eas e fo ll owi ng a pr io r fed eral fel on -in -p os se ss io n s en te nc e, an d hi s su bs ta nc e-ab us e is su es , a s well as th e
ne ed to pr ot ect th e pu bl ic an d effe ct iv el y de te r fu tu re cri m in al co nd uc t. See Uni te d St at es v. Mag nu m , 62 5 F.3 d 46 6, 46 9- 70 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (wh ere di st ric t co ur t

su ffi ci en tl y ex pl ai ns se nt en ci ng de ci si on , ap pe ll at e co ur t m us t gi ve du e de fere nc e to

co ur t’s de ci si on th at § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) fact or s jus ti fy ex te nt of up ward va ria nc e; up ward

va ria nc e is reas on ab le whe re c o u rt m ak es in di vi du al iz ed as se ss m en t of § 35 53 (a)

-2

-fact or s) ; cf. Uni te d St at es v. Dav id , 68 2 F.3 d 10 74 , 10 77 -7 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (u pwa rd

va ria nc e m ay be warra nt ed whe re de fen da nt r e p e a ts cri m in al co nd uc t sh or tl y aft er
co m pl et in g p un is hm en t fo r pr ev io us off en se ).

Fi na ll y , ha vi ng 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) , we fin d no no nf riv ol ou s is s u e s

. A c c o r di ng ly, we gr an t co un se l’s m ot io n t o wi th dr aw. The ju dg m en t i s af fir m ed

.

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

-3

-