# 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- 20 68

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 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.
Terran ce Leo n P arg o
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 ct of I owa - Des M oi ne s

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Octo be r 29 , 20 13 Fi le d: Nov em

be r 6, 2 01 3 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, BYE, an d B ENTON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Terran ce Parg o pl ead ed g u i lt y to on e co un t of fai li ng to reg is te r as a se x of fen de r in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 22 50

. The di st ric t co ur t im po se d a se nt en ce of 1

Th e Hon or ab le St ep ha ni e M. Ro se , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r t h e 1 So ut he rn Dis tri ct of I owa

.21 m on th s in pr is on an d 5 y ears of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. On ap pe al , co un se l ha s m ov ed

to wi t h d r a w a nd 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 di st ric t co ur t erre d in im po si ng , as a sp eci al co nd it io n of su pe rv is ed

r e l e a s e, th e req ui rem en t th at Parg o un de rg o se x- of fen de r tre at m en t. The br ie f a l s o st at es th at Parg o b e l ie ve s he was in co rrec tl y cl as si fie d as a Tier II se x of fen de r fo r pu rp os es of c al cu la ti ng hi s ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s s en te nc e.

W e 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 in im po si ng th e
su pe rv is ed -rel eas e co nd it io n. See 18 U.S.C. § 35 83 (d )(1 )-(3 ); Uni te d S t a t e s v

. Sch aefe r, 67 5 F.3 d 11 22 , 11 24 -2 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). Sp eci fic al ly, Parg o’s se x of

fen se , al th ou gh 14 y ears earl ie r, was ag ai ns t a m in or , an d hi s
su bs eq ue nt rep eat ed co nv ic ti on s fo r fai lu re to reg is te r, an d hi s ab sc on di ng , refl ect ed im pu ls iv e be ha vi or , po or de ci si on m ak in g, an d a rel u c t an ce to co m pl y wit h reg is tr a t i o n req ui rem en ts

. See Uni te d St at es v. W al te rs , 64 3 F.3 d 10 77 , 10 79 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (req ui rem en ts fo r di st ric t co ur t to im po se sp eci al co nd it io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e); Uni te d St at es v. Sm it h, 65 5 F.3 d 83 9, 84 5- 46 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (req ui rin g se xof fen de r tre at m en t as supe rv is ed -rel eas e co nd it io n fo r ne w fai lu re-t o- reg is te r of fen se
was supp or

te d by re co rd , whic h re fl ect ed hi st or y of av oi di ng se x- of fen de r reg is tra ti on
an d co m m it ti ng se x of

fen se ag ai ns t m in or ), rev ’d on ot he r gr ou nd s, 13 2 S. Ct

. 27 12 (2 01 2) (Me m .); Uni te d St at es v. Sm art , 47 2 F.3 d 55 6, 55 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (uph ol di ng
su pe rv is ed -rel eas e co nd it io n req ui rin g de fen da nt to un de rg o se x- of fen de r tre at m en t fo ll owi ng co nv ic ti on forbe in g fe lo n i n po ss es si on of fir earm , wher e d efen da nt ha d earl ie r st at e co nv ic ti on s fo r se x of fen se s)

. We a l so co nc lu de th at Parg o’s cl as si fic at io n as a Tier II se x of fen de r was no t pl ai n erro r. See 42 U.S.C. § 16 91 1( 3) (d efi ni ng Tier II se x of

fen de r); Mi nn

. St at

. § 60 9.3 45 (1 )(b ) (1 99 8) (d efi ni ng cri m in al

se xu al co nd uc t in th e fo ur th de gr ee); Uni te d St at es v. Mo ln ar, 59 0 F.3 d 91 2, 91 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (s ta nd ard of r ev ie w).

-2

-Fi na ll y , ha vi ng rev ie wed th e reco rd un de r Pen so n v. Ohi o, 48 8 U.S. 75 , 80

(1 98 8) , we fin d n o n on fri vo lo us is su es

. Acco rd in gl y , we gr an t cou ns el ’s m ot io n to wit hd raw, an d we a ffi rm

.

-3

-