2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 11-18-2010 

# U SA v . T r a cey Le a P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 10-1429

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . T r a c ey L e a" (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 236. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/236NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL

U N IT E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 10- 1429

______ UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. T RA CE Y L E A, A ppel l ant

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . N o. 2- 05- cr - 00479- 002) D istric t Ju d g e : H o n o ra b le L e g ro m e D . D a v is

Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

N ovember8, 2010 B efore: M cK E E , C hief J ud ge, S L O V ITE R , and C O W E N , C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: N ovember18, 2010)

______ OP I NI ONT h e D is tr ic t C o u rt h a d ju ri s d ic tio n u n d e r 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 3231. W e have j ur i s di ct i on under18 U . S. C . § 374 2 (a) and 28 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . 2 S L O V IT E R , C i r cui tJudge. A ppel l antT r ace yL ea w as s ent ence d t o t w el ve mont hs i m pr i s onm entfora s er i es o f p ro b a tio n v io latio n s. S h e a p p e a ls th e re a so n a b len e ss o f th a t se n ten c e . W e w ill 1 a f f ir m . I. In 2 0 0 6 , L e a p led g u iltyto m a k in g a f a lse sta tem e n t to a f

ire a rm s lic e n se e in vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 924( a) ( 1) ( A ) and w as s ent ence d t o t hr ee y ear s of pr obat i on. L ea s ubs equent l yvi ol at ed condi t i ons of herpr obat i on. C ons equent l y , bas ed on a G ui del i nes r ange of t hr ee t o ni ne mont hs i m pr i s onm ent , L ea w as s ent ence d t o s i x m ont hs i m pr i s onm entand thi r t ym ont hs s upervi s ed r el eas e, w i t h t he fi r s t120 day s i n a hal fw ay hous e. L ea a ppeal ed thats ent ence and w e af fi r m ed. U

ni t ed Stat es v. Lea , 350 F. A pp’ x. 7 5 4 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) ( n o t p re c e d e n tia l) . O nce r el eas ed fr om cus t ody , L ea a gai n vi ol at ed the condi t i ons of hers upervi s ed r el eas e byfai l i ng t o r epor tt o herpr obat i on offi cer , fai l i ng t o advi s e the pr obat i on offi cer of herchange of addr es s , us i ng i l l egal drugs , and fa i l i ng t o par t i ci pat e i n a tr eatm ent pr ogr am. T he G ui del i nes r ange f ort hes e vi ol at i ons w as agai n t hr ee t o ni ne mont hs i m pr i s onm ent . T he D i s t r i ctC our thel d a r evoca t i on hear i ng. A tt he hea r i ng, L ea di d not denyt he vi ol at i ons and agr eed thata t erm of i m pr i s onm entw as appr opr i at e. T he3

G overnm entand pr obat i on offi cerr ecomm ended a t erm of i m pr i s onm entatt he hi gh end of thi s r ange, w i t h no s upervi s i on t o fol l ow . A ft erdi s cus s i ng t he vi ol at i ons w i t h t he Lea, t he pr obat i on offi cer , and couns el , t he D i s t r i ctC our ti m pos ed a s ent ence of tw el ve m o n th s im p riso n m e n t, w ith n o su p e rv ise d re lea se to f o llo w . T h e im p riso n m e n t term is t hr ee mont hs l ongert han the hi gh end of the G ui del i nes r ange. II. W e re v ie w th e re a s o n a b le n e s s o f a s e n te n c e u n d e r a n a b u s e -o f -d is c re tio n s ta n d a rd . U ni t ed Stat es v. Tom ko , 562 F. 3d 558, 564- 68 ( 3d C i r . 2009) ( en banc ) . T her e i s no d ispu te th at th e D istri ct C o u rtac cu ratelyca lculated the G u idelines ran g e, no r w ere there anym ot i ons fordepartur e. A l t hough t he def endantdoes notexpr es s l ycompl ai n t hatt he C our ti m pos ed an a bove- G ui del i nes s ent ence , s uch a s ent ence w as cons i s t entw i t h t he D istric t C o u rt’s a c tio n s in im p o sin g p ro g re ss iv e lym o re se rio u s s a n c tio n s in a n e f f o rt to bri ng t he d efen dan ti nto com pli ance. Th e C ou rtst at ed ithad pu rposefull ycho sen a ha rs h s ent ence i n t he hope thatL ea w oul d be more m ot i vat ed t o compl yw i t h t he di ct at es of the law , stat ing “I w an t y o u to u n d erstan d that the jail is an u n co m fo rt ab le ex p erien ce w h ere y o u are m issi n g thing s tha t are im p o rt an t t o y o u . . . . ” S u p p . A p p . at 30 . T h e C o u rt co n ti n u ed , “if y o u think that, y o u ca n co m e to th at reali za ti o n , m ayb e n ex t t im e y o u ’l l try har derati t . ” I

d. A s i n herpr i orappea l , L ea c ont ends t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tfai l ed t o cons i derand appl yt he 18 U . S. C . § 3553( a) fac t or s . H ow ever , t he r ecor d r efl ect s t hatt o t he ext entt hes e mi t i gat i ng fac t or s w er e r ai s ed, t he D i s t r i ctC our tcons i der ed ea ch of them w hen

c r a f t i n g a s e n t e n c e . Ac c o r d i n g l y , t h e s e n t e n c e wa s p r o c e d u r a l l yr e a s o n a b l e . No rc a n we concl ude thatt he s ent ence w as a s ubs t ant i vel yunr eas onabl e abus e of di s cr et i on gi ven L e a ’s re p e a te d v io la tio n s a n d th e n e e d f o r i n c re m e n ta l p u n is h m e n t. III . Fort he above - s t at ed r eas ons , w e w i l l aff i r m t he j udgm entand s ent ence .

4