# 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- 24 87

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 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.

W il li am Lawren ce

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 Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 0, 2 01 4 Fil ed : Ap ril 24 , 20 14

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re WOL LMAN, MURPHY, an d GRUENDER, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

W OLLMAN, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

W il li am Lawren ce pl ead ed gu il ty to us in g in te rs ta te co m m erce faci li ti es in th e

co m m is si on of m

ur de r-fo r-h ire
, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 19 58

. The di st ric t co ur t 1
d e p a r t ed do wnwar d fro m th e Uni te d St at es Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s (Gu id el in es or

The Hon or ab le Caro l E. Ja ck so n, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.U.S.S.G.) te rm of 12 0 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t an d se nt en ced Lawren ce to 72 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. Lawren ce arg ue s on ap pe al th at hi s se nt en c e i s s ub st an ti ve ly

un reas on ab le . W e aff

irm.

I.

Lawren ce ha s a hi st or y of m en ta l il ln es s. On Feb ru ary 6, 20 12 , Lawren ce was in vo lv ed in a p h ys i c a l al te rcat io n wit h po li ce of fic ers at hi s ho m e aft er th e of fic ers

res po nd ed to a 91 1 cal l fr o m o n e of Lawren ce’s ne ig hb or s, who to ld po li ce th at Lawren ce ha d br an di sh ed a rif le an d m ad e th reat en in g rem ark s du rin g an arg um en t. Afte r su bd ui ng Lawren ce, th e of fic ers co nd uc te d a pr ot ect iv e swe ep of hi s ho m e an d

se iz ed two fir earm s, a m ari juan a pl an t, m ari

juan a se ed s, and se ve ral gl as s pi pe s. In th e d a ys f

ol lo win g th e al te rcat io n, Lawren ce cal le d th e po li ce st at io n at le as t fiv e ti m es to de m an d th e ret ur n of hi s fir earm s, whi ch were be i n g h e l d as ev id en ce. Lawren ce ev en tu al ly ap pe ared at th e po li ce st at io n in pe rs on wit h th e sa m e de m an d.

On o r aro un d March 1, 2 01 2, Lawre nc e p os te d a cla ss ifi ed ad on th e web si te Crai gs li st .co m th at st at ed : “ W an te d de ad
, al l th e m ap le woo d ci ty po li ce of fic ers , p a yi n g on e m il li on pe r he ad

. two m il li on fo r de te ct iv es Kerry Dan ie ls .” W he n Map le woo d po li ce de te rm in ed th at Lawren ce ha d po st ed th e ad
, th ey arre st ed
Lawren ce an d ch arg ed hi m wit h th e us e of an in te rs ta te co m m erce faci l i t y i n th e

co m m is si on of m

ur de r-fo r-h ire

. Lawren ce waiv ed hi s rig ht to an i n d i c t men t an d pl ead ed gu il ty to th e ch arg e. He la te r fle d to Co lo rad o Sp rin gs , Co lo rad o, whe re he

was fou nd on Decem

be r 7, 2 01 2, s le ep in g b eh in d a du m ps te r.

Lawren ce’s Gui de li ne s se nt en ci ng r an ge was 29 2 to 36 5 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. His Gui de li ne s te rm of im pr is on m en t was red uc ed to 12 0 m on th s, th e

m a x im um te rm al lo wed un de r 18 U.S.C. § 19 52

. At se nt en ci ng , th e di st ric t co ur t de pa rte d do wnwar d fro m th e Gui de li ne s s e n t e n c e ba se d on Lawren ce’s m en ta l il ln es s, se e U.S.S.G. § 5H1 .3, an d se nt en ced Lawren ce to 72 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t.

-2

-II.

We r e vi ew th e su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss of Lawren ce’s se nt en ce fo r ab u s e of di sc ret io n. Uni te d St at es v. Feem st er, 57 2 F.3 d 45 5, 46 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 0 9 )

. A

se nt en ci ng co ur t ab us es it s di sc ret io n whe n it “ fai ls to co ns id er a rel ev an t fact or th at sh ou ld ha ve rece iv ed si gn ifi can t weig ht ; gi ve s s ig ni fic an t wei gh t t o a n i m pr op er o r irr el ev an t fact or ; o r co ns id ers on ly th e ap pr op ria te fact or s bu t [in weig hi ng th os e fact or s] co m

m it s a cl ear erro r of jud gm en t.” Uni te d St at es v. Gan t, 72 1 F.3 d 50 5, 51 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Ri ch art , 6 62 F.3 d 10 37 , 10 51 (8t h C ir. 2 01 1) ). Thes e fac to rs are s et for th in 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a).

Lawren ce ass ert s th at th e di st ric t cou rt gav e in su ffi ci en t weig ht to hi s m en ta l il ln e s s i n s e n t e nc in g hi m

. To th e co nt rary, th e di st ric t co ur t ga ve gr eat weig ht to Lawren ce’s m en ta l il ln es s, de pa rti ng do wnwar d fro m hi s Gui de li ne s se nt en ce by 48

m on th s de sp it e fin di ng th at Lawren ce’s hi st or y of in ap pr op ria te be ha vi or , co m bi ne d wit h hi s acce ss to fir earm s, crea te d a “ po te nt ia ll y ex pl os iv e si tu at io n.” Thi s hi st or y is well do cu m en te d. In 20 10 , Lawren ce ve rb al ly ab us ed po li ce of fic ers whi le be in g

ar r es te d fo r dr iv in g whi le in to xi cat ed

. In th e in ci de nt th at pr eci pi ta te d th e in st an t of fen se , Lawren ce br an di sh ed a fir earm an d tu ss le d wit h po l i c e o ffi cers who

res po nd ed to th e sc en e. Afte r th e of fic ers co nf

is cat ed hi s fir earm s, Lawren ce so ug ht
to ha ve th e of

fic ers ki ll ed an d la te r fle d to Co lo rad o to av oi d p r o s ecu ti on

. Thi s be ha vi or in di cat es bo th th at Lawren ce is pr on e to vi ol en t th ou gh ts an d th at he
po ss es se s su ffi ci en t in di vi du al au to no m y to act on th os e th ou gh ts

. Thu s, ev en th ou gh
Lawren ce ha s no t y et cau se d se rio us ha rm , th e di st ric t co ur t was wit hi n it s di sc ret io n
to co ns id er h is cap aci ty to ca us e su ch ha rm in th e fu tu re.

III.

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ -3

-