FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Febr uar y 1, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ 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. 05- 10921 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 4 - 2 0 5 4 6 - C R - F AM 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 O S M A Y O D U A R D O , 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

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 1, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , D U B IN A an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: O s m a y O dua r do appe a l s hi s 210- m onth c onc urr e nts e nt e nc e s , w hi c h the2

d is tr ic t c o u r t im p o s e d a f te rh e p le a d e d g u ilty to c o n s p ir a c y to p o s s e s s w ith in te n t to di s tr i but e c oc a i ne i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) , a nd c ons pi r a c y t o us e a nd c a rry af i r e a rm dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o adrug tr a f f i c ki ng of f e ns e i n vi ol a t i on of 1 8 U .S .C . § 9 2 4 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( A ) . O d u a r d o c la im s th a t th e u s e o f p r io rc o n v ic tio n s in ca l cul at i ng hi s c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory und erthe advi soryse nt enci ng gu i del i nes s c he m e e s t abl i s he d by U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . __, 125 S . C t . 738, 160 L . E d. 2d 621 ( 2005) , vi ol a t e s the D ue P r oc e s s a nd E x P os tF a c t o C l a us e s of the U ni t ed S t at es C on st i tut i on . O du ar do further a rgues thatthe di stri ctcourti m po se d a n u n r e a s o n ab l e s e n t e n c e o n h i m b e c a u s e o n e o f h i s c o d e f

e n d a n t s , w i th th e s a me offe nse l evel and cri m i nal hi st ory c at egory a s hi m , re ce i ved a l es se r s ent ence s than he di d. F i na l l y , O dua r do a r gue s tha tthe gove rnm e ntbr e a c he d i t s pl e aa gr e e m e nt w i th h i m by no tre com m endi ng a s ent ence atthe l ow end o f the gu i del i ne ra ng e. I. B ecau se O d u ard o rai sed h i s sen t en ci n g arg u m en t s u n d er th e D u e P ro cess a n d E x P o s t F a c to C la u s e s f o rth e f ir s t tim e o n ap p e a l, w e r e v ie w th e m f o rp la in e rr o r . U n ite d S ta te s v . A g u illa r d , 2 1 7 F .3 d 1 3 1 9 , 1 3 2 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . W e w ill, i n ourdi s c r e t i on, c orr e c tpl a i n e rr orw he r e the r e i s ( 1) e rr or , ( 2) tha ti s pl a i n, a nd ( 3) tha ta f

f e c t s s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s , butonl y i f ( 4) the e rr ors e r i ous l y a f f e c t s the f a i rne s s , i nt e gr i ty , orpubl i c r e put a t i on of j udi c i a l pr oc e e di ngs . U ni t e d S t a t e s v.3

R odr i gue z , 398 F . 3d 1291, 1298 ( 11th C i r . ) , c e r t . de ni e d, 125 S . C t . 2935 ( 2005) (i nt ernal ci t at i on s a nd qu ot at i on s om i tt ed). W e ha ve he l d the r e a r e no due pr oc e s s ore x pos tf a c t o vi ol a t i ons ba s e d on the re troac t i ve appl i ca t i on of B oo ker’ s r em edi al op i ni on m aki ng the gu i del i nes a d v is o ry . U n ite d S ta te s v . D u n c a n , 4 0 0 F .3 d 1 2 9 7 , 1 3 0 6 - 0 8 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , c e r t. d en i ed , 1 2 6 S . C t . 4 3 2 (2 0 0 5 ). In D u n can , w e d et erm i n ed th atb ecau se B ooke rm a de the gui de l i ne s a dvi s ory , notm a nda t ory , “ the va r i ous t op r a nge s of th e G u id e lin e s a r e n o lo n g e rb in d in g , a n d th e r e f o r e , n o lo n g e rc o n s titu te ‘little r e le v a n t m a x im u m s .’ T h is le a v e s a s th e o n ly m a x im u m s e n te n c e th e o n e s e t o u t in the U ni t ed S t at es C od e. ” I d. at13 03 . W e f urther not ed i n D un ca n that , even un der m andat ory gui del i nes, “ the l aw of thi s C i rc ui tre cogn i ze d the U . S . C od e a s th e s o u r c e o f

th e m a x im u m s e n te n c e .” I d . a t 1 3 0 8 . T o the ext entthatO du ar do i s a rgui ng thatthe di stri ctcourti m prop er l y use d hi s pri or conv i ct i on s t o cal cul at e hi s c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory bas ed on B oo ker, thi s i s m e r i t l e s s be c a us e w e ha ve rul e d tha tB ooke rdi d notdi s turb the c onc l us i on i n A l m e nda r e z - T orr e s v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 523 U . S . 224, 118 S . C t . 1219, 140 L . E d. 2d 35 0 (19 98 ), thatthe go vernm entdo es no tneed t o al l ege i n i t s i nd i ctm entand d oes notne e d t o pr ove be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubttha tade f e nda ntha d pr i orc onvi c t i ons in o r d e rf

o rth e d is tr ic t c o u r t to u s e th o s e c o n v ic tio n s f o rs e n te n c e e n h a n c e m e n ts .The Court in Shepard he ld that, under the Armed Career Criminal Act, when 1 deter mining whether a

plea of guilty to burg lary

define d by

a nong eneric statute admitted elements of theg eneric offense, a sentencingcourt is limited to consideration of the charging document, the ter

ms of the plea agreement, or transcript of the colloquy between the judg e and defendant in which the f

actual basis for the plea

was c onfirmed by

the def endant. Shepa

rd, 125 S.Ct . at 1263. Consideration of thesethings did not violate the Six th Amendment. I d. at 1262- 63. 4 U n ite d S ta te s v . C a n te lla n o , 4 3 0 F .3 d 1 1 4 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . F u r th e rm o r e , w h ile the de c i s i on i n S he pa r d v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , __ U . S . __, 125 S . C t . 1254, 161 L . E d. 2d 20 5 (20 05 ), m ayhave cas tdo ub ton the A l m endarez -T orre s hol di ng , the U ni t ed

1 S ta te s S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s n o t e x p lic itly o v e rru le d it y e t, s o w e a r e s till b o u n d b y it. U n ite d S ta te s v . C a m a c h o - I b a r q u e n , 4 1 0 F .3 d 1 3 0 7 , 1 3 1 6 n .3 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , c e r t. d e n ie d , 1 2 6 S .C t. 4 5 7 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . O du ar do ’ s a rgum ent s und erthe D ue P roce ss and E x P ostF ac t o cl ause s a re m er i t l es s. A tthe t i m e O du ar do com m i tt ed the offens e, the gu i del i nes w er e dee m ed m andat ory a nd pri or conv i ct i on s w er e use d i n cal cul at i ng a def endant ’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory. H e had am pl e w arni ng , base d o n the m axi m um st atut ory se nt ence s s etou ti n the U . S . C od e, thata l i fe se nt ence w as a possi bl e c on se qu ence o f h is a c tio n s . H e a ls o k n e w th a t h is p r io rc o n v ic tio n s w o u ld b e u s e d in cal cu l at i n g h i s ap p l i cab l e g u i d el i n e ran g e. T h erefo re, n o d u e p ro cess o r ex p o st fact o v i o l at i o n s are i m p l i cat ed i n th i s case. S ee D u n can , 4 0 0 F . 3 d at1 3 0 7 ; see al so 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( ii) . E ven ass um i ng ar gu endo thatthere w as error, O du ar do coul d n otprov e that5

h is s u b s ta n tia l r ig h ts w e r e a f f e c te d b e c a u s e h e w a s s e n te n c e d w ith in th e ap p lic ab le gui de l i ne r a nge t o 210 m onths ’ i m pr i s onm e nt . T hi s s a m e r a nge w oul d ha ve ap p lie d u n d e rth e m a n d a to ry g u id e lin e s s c h e m e in e f f e c t p r io rto B o o k e r . A c c o r d in g ly , w e a f

f irm th e d is tr ic t c o u rt in th is r e s p e c t.

II. A ft erthe di stri ctcourthas a cc urat el y c al cul at ed the gu i del i ne ra ng e, i t“ m ay i m p o se a m o re sev ere o r m o re l en i en tsen t en ce” th atw e rev i ew fo r reaso n ab l en ess. U ni t ed S t at es v. C ra w ford, 40 7 F . 3d 11 74 , 11 78 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). W hen f a s h io n in g ar e a s o n ab le s e n te n c e , ad is tr ic t c o u r t s h o u ld b e g u id e d b y th e f a c to r s in 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) . U ni t ed S t at es v. W i ni ng ea r, 42 2 F . 3d 12 41 , 12 46 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). D i stri ctcourt s do n otneed t o est abl i sh the re as on abl enes s of the se nt ence s the y i m pos e by e xpl i c i t l y c ons i de r i ng e ve ry f a c t orf r om §3553( a ) on the r e c or d; som e i nd i ca t i on i n the re cord thatthe courtadequat el y a nd prop er l y c on si dere d appr opr i a t e f

a c t or s i n c onj unc t i on w i th the s e nt e nc e w i l l be s uf f i c i e ntw he n the di s tr i c tc our ti m pos e s as e nt e nc e w i thi n the gui de l i ne s r a nge . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S cott , 42 6 F . 3d 13 24 , 13 29 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). In se nt enci ng O du ar do atthe t op of the advi sorygu i del i ne ra ng e, the di stri ct courtfoun d thathi s c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory s i gn i fi ca nt l y und er st at ed that se ri ou snes s of hi s c ri m i nal hi st ory. T he di stri ctcourtal so consi dere d the hi st ory6

an d ch aract eri st i cs o f O d u ard o w h en i tn o t ed h i s l en i en tsen t en ces fo r si m i l ar p ast conv i ct i on s. S ee § 3 55 3(a) (1). Itfurther f ou nd thata s ever e s ent ence w as n e c e s s a ry to p r o m o te r e s p e c t f o rth e la w , p r o te c t th e p u b lic , a n d a f f o r d a d e q u a te de t e rr e nc e . S e e § 3553( a ) ( 2) ( A ) - ( C ) . I ta l s o f ound, ba s e d on O dua r do’ s num e r ous other c on vi ct i on s, thathe w as beyond need of any corr ec t i on al tre atm ent . S ee § 3 55 3(a) (2)( D ). T hu s, the di stri ctcourtadequat el y a nd prop er l y c on si dere d r e le v a n t § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s in s e n te n c in g O d u a r d o . O dua r do’ s a r gum e nttha tthe di s tr i c tc our tvi ol a t e d the § 3553( a ) f a c t orof a voi di ng unw a rr a nt e d s e nt e nc i ng di s pa r i t i e s i s w i thoutm e r i t . F i r s t , a ts e nt e nc i ng, the di stri ctcourtno t ed thatO du ar do ’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory w as m ore s er i ou s than that of hi s c ode f

e nda nt s . T hus , the di s tr i c tc our tc ons i de r e d the f a c t orof a voi di ng un w arra nt ed se nt enci ng di spar i t i es , and i m pl i ci t l y r ej ec t ed i t , fi nd i ng that O dua r do’ s of

f e ns e w a rr a nt e d ahi ghe rs e nt e nc e tha n hi s c ode f e nda nt s . T ha tthe di s tr i c tc our tdi d notm e nt i on unw a rr a nt e d s e nt e nc i ng di s pa r i t i e s i n i m pos i ng se nt ence i s i rr el evantbecause the di stri ctcourti s notre qu i re d t o m ent i on every § 3 55 3(a) fa ct or. S cott , 42 6 F . 3d at13 29 . F i nal l y, di spar i ty betw ee n sent ence s im p o s e d o n c o d e f

e n d a n ts is g e n e r a lly n o t a n ap p r o p r ia te b a s is f o rr e lie f o n ap p e a l. S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R e gue i r o, 240 F . 3d 1321, 1325- 26 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( de a l i ng w ith § 5 K 2 .7 d e p a r tu r e ) .7

F ur the rm or e , the di s tr i c tc our tc oul d ha ve i m pos e d al i f e s e nt e nc e on O dua r do. S e e W i ni nge a r , 422 F . 3d a t1246 ( c om pa r i ng, a s one i ndi c a t i on of r e a s o n ab le n e s s , th e a c tu a l p r is o n te rm im p o s e d a g a in s t th e s ta tu to ry m a x im u m ) . T he di s tr i c tc our ta l s o not e d tha ti tthoughtar e a s onabl e s e nt e nc e w oul d be one ab o v e th e g u i d el i n e ran g e, b u trefrained fro m i m p o si n g a h i g h er sen t en ce b ecau se O du ar do pl ed gu i l ty. B as ed on al l these consi dera t i on s, the se nt ence i s r ea sonabl e, a n d w e a f

f irm th e d is tr ic t c o u r t in th is r e s p e c t. III. W he the rornotthe gove rnm e ntha s br e a c he d apl e aa gr e e m e nti s aque s t i on of l a w tha tw e r e vi e w de novo. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M a hi que , 150 F . 3d 1330, 1332 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . “I f

, h o w e v e r , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a f f o r d s ad e f

e n d a n t a n o p p o r tu n ity to o b je c t a f te rth e im p o s itio n o f

s e n te n c e , a n dh e f

a ils to d o s o , a n y o b

je c tio n s to th e sen t en ce are b arred ab sen tm an i festi n j u st i ce. ” Id . W e eq u at e m an i fest i nj ust i ce w i th p l ai n err or. Id. In the i nst antca se , af t erthe di stri ctcourti m po se d s e nt e nc e , O dua r do di d nots pe c i f i c a l l y obj e c tba s e d on the pl e aa gr e e m e ntorm ove to w ith d r a w h is g u ilty p le a , b u t h e d id n o te th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t h a da g r e e d to r e c om m e nd as e nt e nc e a tthe l ow e nd of the gui de l i ne r a nge , a nd obj e c t e d t o the go vernm entre com m endi ng an up w ar d d eparture a nd no tre com m endi ng se nt ence a t th e lo w e n d o f

th e r a n g e . H o w e v e r , w e n e e d n o t d e c id e w h a t th e ap p r o p r ia te8

s t a nda r d of

r e vi e w i s be c a us e O dua r do c a nnotpr e va i l unde re i the rs t a nda r d. W e vi e w apl e aa gr e e m e nta s ac ontr a c tbe tw e e n the gove rnm e nta nd the cr i m i nal defe nd ant . U ni t ed S t at es v. H ow l e, 16 6 F . 3d 11 66 , 11 68 (11th C i r. 19 99 ). A m at er i al prom i se by the go vernm ent , w hi ch i nd uces the defendantt o p l ea d g u i l ty , b i n d s th e g o v e rn me n tt o th a tp r o mi s e . Sa n t o b e l l o v . N e w Y o rk , 4 0 4 U . S. 257, 262, 92 S . C t . 495, 499, 30 L . E d. 2d 427 ( 1971) . W he n apl e ar e s t s i n a ny si gn i fi ca ntpo rt i on on the go vernm ent ’ s prom i se or agre em ent , so thati tbecom es p a r t o f th e in d u c e m e n t o rc o n s id e r a tio n , s u c h p r o m is e m u s t b e f u lf ille d . I d . W he the rthe gove rnm e ntvi ol a t e d the pl e aa gr e e m e nti s j udge d a c c or di ng t o the defe nd ant ’ s r ea sonabl e und er st andi ng atthe t i m e thathe ent er ed hi s pl ea . U ni t ed S t at es v. T ay l or, 77 F . 3d 36 8, 37 0 (11 th C i r. 19 96 ). O n the other hand, w hether the di s tr i c tc our tc ons i de r e d orw a s i nf l ue nc e d by the gove rnm e nt ’ s pos i t i on on the s e n te n c in g is s u e is n o t r e le v a n t. U n ite d S ta te s v . J o h n s o n , 1 3 2 F .3 d 6 2 8 , 6 3 0 ( 1 1 th C i r. 19 98 ). W hen a breac h o f a n agreement by the go vernm enthas bee n e s tab lis h e d , w e m a y r e m a n d th e c a s e to th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, w h ic h m a y o r d e rs p e c if ic pe r f orm a nc e of

the a gr e e m e ntora l l ow w i thdr a w a l of the pl e a . S a nt obe l l o, 404 U .S . a t 2 6 2 - 6 3 , 9 2 S .C t. a t 4 9 9 . Th e g o v e rn me n td i d n o tb r e a c h i t s p l e aa g r e e me n tw i th O d u a r d o . By vi e w i ng apl e aa gr e e m e nta s ac ontr a c t , w e i m pl y tha tboth the gove rnm e nta nd theOduardo’s re quest for oral argument is denied. 2 9 defe nd anthave ob l i gat i on s thatthey m ustperf orm t o ful fi l l the agree m ent . S ee H ow l e, 16 6 F . 3d at11 68 . T he l angu age of the pl eaagre em enti nd i ca t es that O du ar do ’ s duty t o m ake f ul l di sc l osures t o the go vernm entand p robat i on offi ce w as a c on di t i on prec edentt o the go vernm ent ’ s a gree m entt o rec om m end a se nt ence a tthe l ow e nd of

the gui de l i ne r a nge . B a s e d on the r e s ol ve d f a c t s i n the P S I a nd the pl e ac ol l oquy , O dua r do di d notm a ke f ul l a nd a c c ur a t e di s c l os ur e s t o the pr oba t i on offi ce and m i sr epre se nt ed fa ct s t o the go vernm entpri or t o ent er i ng i nt o the pl ea a g r e e m e n t. O dua r do a l s o c om m i tt e d m i s c onduc ta f t e re nt e r i ng i nt o the pl e aa gr e e m e nt by br e a c hi ng the pl e aa gr e e m e nt . O dua r do m a de c ons t i tut i ona l obj e c t i ons t o the s e nt e nc i ng gui de l i ne s w he n he c ha l l e nge d the drug qua nt i ty a nd gun e nha nc e m e nt unde rB ooke r , e ve n though he w a i ve d hi s abi l i ty t o do thi s . H e a l s o obj e c t e d t o the la c k o f am in o r - r o le r e d u c tio n w h e n b o th p a r tie s a g r e e d n o t to s e e k ar o le a dj us tm e nt . T hus , O dua r do di d notf ul f i l l hi s c ondi t i on pr e c e de ntt o the g o v e rn m e n t r e c o m m e n d in g s e n te n c e a t th e lo w e n d o f th e g u id e lin e r a n g e . T he r e f or e , the gove rnm e nt ’ s s ubs e que nta c t i on of r e c om m e ndi ng as e nt e nc e above th e g u id e lin e r a n g e c a n n o t b e v ie w e d a s ab r e a c h a n d w e a f f irm th e d is tr ic t c o u r t in th is r e s p e c t. AF F I RME D. 2