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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 5- 38 55

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

Ch arl es Sch rad er

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 Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta - Rap id Cit y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Octo be r 21 , 20 16 Fil ed : Fe br ua ry

2, 2 01 7 [Pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , W OLLMAN and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Ch arl es D. Sch rad er vi ol at ed th e co nd it io ns of hi s su pe rv is ed re l eas e. He
ap pe al s on ly t h e d i st ric t co ur t’s refu sa l to red act th e Su pp le m en ta l Pres en te nc e 1

The Hon or ab le Karen E. Sch rei er, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of So ut h Dak ot a.In ve st ig at io n Rep or t (PSR ). Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C. § 12 91 , th is co ur t

affi rm s.

The go ve rn m en t so ug ht to rev o ke Sch rad er’s su pe rv is ed rel eas e fo r two

reas on s: (1 ) co cai ne po ss es si on an d (2 ) se xu al as sa ul t. It l a t e r ad de d (3 ) al co ho l

co ns um pt io n. Befo re th e he ari ng , th e go ve rn m en t an no un ced it di d no t ha ve an d

wou ld no t pr es en t ev id en ce ab ou t al le ga ti on s (1 ) an d (2 ). Sch rad er pr es en te d

ev id en ce th at th e vi ct im fab ric at ed al le ga ti on s (1 ) an d (2 ). The di st ric t co ur t gr an te d Sch rad er’s m ot io n to se al bo th pe ti ti on s, bu t refu se d to st rik e al le ga ti on s (1 ) an d (2 ). The co ur t st at ed th at Sch rad er di d no t ha ve a rig ht to am en d t h e p et it io ns be cau se th ey were no t hi s pl ead in gs an d were ba se d on in fo rm at io n at th e ti m e of fil in g. The

co ur t g ran te d t he go ve rn m en t’s m ot io n t o d is m is s al le ga ti on s (1 ) an d (2 ).

The di st ric t co ur t su st ai ne d t w o f a c t ua l ob jecti on s to th e PSR pa rag rap hs

co ve rin g al le ga ti on s (1 ) an d (2 ). It, h owe ve r, refu se d to red act or am en d th e pa rag rap hs

. The co ur t em ph as iz ed th at th e he ari ng tra ns cri pt an d P SR woul d sh ow th at th e ob

jecti on s were su st ai ne d, an d th at th e jud gm en t wou ld sh ow th at al le ga ti on s (1 ) an d (2 ) were d is m is se d.

Sch rad er co nt en ds th at th e refu sa l to red act i n f or m at io n ab ou t th e al le ge d

se xu al as sa ul t was an ab us e of d i s c r e t i o n

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. McLemo re , 5 F.3 d 33 1 , 3 3 2 (8 th Ci r. 19 93 ) (rev ie win g di st ric t co ur t act io n on PSR ch al le ng es fo r

co m pl ia nc e wit h Ru le 32 ). Se e al so Uni te d St at es v. Asa nt e , 78 2 F.3 d 63 9, 64 9 (1 1t h C i r

. 20 11 ) (rev ie win g fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n) ; Uni te d St at es v. LeBl an c , 76 2 F

. 2 d 50 2, 5 05 (6t h C ir. 1 98 5) (sa m e).

Fed eral Ru le of Cri m in al Pro ced ur e 32 “ do es no t req ui re a co ur t t o st rik e

co nt ro ve rte d m at eri al no t con si de red in se nt en ci ng

. . . . The d is tri ct co ur t need on ly

sa ti sf y Ru le 32 .” Uni te d St at es v. Smi th , 40 F.3 d 93 3, 93 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 94 )

. Se e al so Uni te d St at es v. Orc ha rd , 33 2 F. 3 d 1 1 3 3 , 1 13 7 n.2 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ). Ru le 32 (d )(3 )

-2

-ex cl ud es fro m a PSR, as rel ev an t he re, two types of in fo rm at io n: “ (A) an y di ag no se s

th a t , if di sc lo se d, m ig ht se rio us ly di sr up t a reh ab il it at io n pr og ram ;

. . . an d (C) an y ot he r in fo rm at io n th at , if di sc lo se d, m ig ht res ul t in ph y si cal or ot he r ha r m t o th e de fen da nt or o th ers .”

S ch rad er co nt en ds th at th e se xu al -as sa ul t al le ga ti on s wil l di sr up t h i s reh ab il it at iv e pr og ram be cau se a se xu al of fen se wil l pr ev en t hi s acce pt an ce to m an y tre at m en t cen te rs

. Sch rad er’s arg um en t ne ve r m en ti on s “ di ag no se s,” as req ui red by Ru le 32 (d )(3 )(A). Sch rad er of fers on ly sp ecu la ti on th at tre at m en t cen te rs wil l reject hi m du e to un pr ov en m at eri al

. PSRs are ge ne ral ly co nf id en ti al

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. W il li ams , 62 4 F.3 d 88 9, 89 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). Onl y wit h a co ur t or de r m ay a PSR be

se e n b y a n yo n e ex cep t th e co ur t, co un se l, or de fen da nt

. Se e D.S.D. Cri m

. LR 32 .1(B ). Mo st im

po rta nt , th e di st ric t co ur t en su red th at th e jud gm en t sh ows th at th e

se xu al -as sa ul t al le ga ti on s wer e d is m is se d.

Sch rad er arg ue s fo r th e fir st ti m e on ap pe al th e po te nt ia l of ph y si cal ha rm fro m th e se xu al -as sa ul t al le ga ti on s. He of fers no reas on in g o r s u p p o r t in g fact s. Eve n if Sch rad er pr es erv ed th is arg um en t, al le gi ng po ss ib le ph y si cal ha rm , wit ho ut m or e, is
to o sp ecu la ti ve to jus ti fy ex cl us io n un de r Ru l e 3 2 ( d )(3 )(C)

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Bar tl et t , 41 6 F. App x 50 8, 51 0 (6 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (fi nd in g no vi ol at io n of Ru le 32 whe re th e di st ric t co ur t refu se d to st rik e se xu al -ab us e al le ga ti on s an d in st ead in di cat ed it di d

no t re so lv e th ei r tr ut h)

.

The di st ric t co ur t fo ll owe d Ru le 32 in ru li ng on th e di sp ut ed PSR pa rag rap hs

. Co m pl ia nc e wit h Ru le 32 su ffi ci en tl y al le vi at es an y co nc ern th at ot he rs wil l rel y on th e un pr ov en al le ga ti on s. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Hop ki ns , 82 4 F.3 d 72 6, 73 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (h ol di ng co nc ern s th at pr is on of fic ia ls wil l rel y on un fo un de d, de tri m en ta l PSR in fo rm at io n are “ met b y a di st ric t co ur t’s co m pl ia nc e wit h Ru le [3 2( i)( 3) (B)]”). Bec au se Ru le 32 do es no t co m pe l ex cl us io n of th e PSR pa rag rap hs , th e di st ric t co ur t

co rrec tl y refu se d t o re da ct th em

.

-3

-* * * * * * *

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

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

-4

-