# 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- 27 93

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

Fern an do Sal ga do

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 Ark an sa s - Li tt le Ro ck

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Apri l 1 5, 2 01 6 Fil ed : J ul y

21 , 20 16 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re GRUENDER, BRIGHT, an d KELLY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __
PER CURI AM.

A jury co nv ic te d a pp el la nt -d efen da nt Fern an do Sal ga do (Sal ga do ) of as sa ul t by st ri k i n g , b e a t i ng , or wou nd in g in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 11 3( a)(4 ), a cri m eco m

m it te d du rin g Sal ga do ’s in carc erat io n fo r an un rel at ed cri m e. The di st ric t co ur t 1

s e n t en ced Sal ga do to a 12 -m on th te rm of im pr is on m en t to ru n co ns ecu ti ve to hi s

se nt en ce of 21 0- m on th s’ im pr is on m en t fo r th e un rel at ed cri m e. Sal ga do a p p e al s,

ar gui ng the se ntence is su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le be cau se it is gr eat er th an ne cessar y
to co m pl y wit h t he pu rp os es of 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a). We affir m

.

I

On Mar ch 29
, 20 12
, th ree in m at es , in cl ud in g Sal ga do
, at ta ck ed a fo ur th in m at e in a recr eat io n

- ya r d c a ge in th e Sp eci al Hou si ng Uni t at th e Fed eral Co rrec ti on al Co m pl ex in Fo rres t Ci ty, Ark an sa s. Sal ga do al le ge dl y se rv ed 33 m on th s in so li ta ry

co nf in em en t as a res ul t of th e a s sa ul t. The go ve rn m en t ch arg ed Sal ga do an d two
ot he r in m at es in a one -co un t in di ct m en t wit h as sa ul t res ul ti ng in se rio us bo di ly in jury,
pu rs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 1 13 (a)( 6)

.

Sal ga do an d a co de fen da nt pr oc eed ed to a jury tri al

. The ju ry fou nd Sal ga do
gu il ty of as sa ul t by st rik in g, be at in g, or wou nd in g, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 1 13 (a)( 4) –a les se r-i nc lu de d o ffen se of t he ch arg ed cri m e.

The di st ric t co ur t he ld Sal ga do ’s se nt en ci ng he ari ng on Ju l y 2 9
, 2 0 1 5. The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed Sal ga do ha d a cri m in al h i s t o ry cat eg or y of VI an d an ad vi so ry g u i d el in e ran ge of 21 to 27 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. Bu t Sal ga do ’s

co nv ic ti on carr ie d a st at ut or y m ax im um p en al ty of 12 -m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. Neit he r pa rty m ov ed fo r a de pa rtu re. Sal ga do req ue st ed th e se nt en ce ru n co nc ur ren t
to Sal ga do ’s se nt en ce fo r th e un rel at ed cr i me in li gh t of th e 33 m on th s Sal ga do al le ge dl y s p e n t i n so li ta ry co nf in em en t. The di st ric t co ur t co ns id ered an d de ni ed Sal ga do ’s req ue st

. The jud ge no te d Sal ga do ’s co de fen da nt s rece iv ed co ns ecu ti ve

The Hon or ab le Kris ti ne G. Bak er, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s.

-2

-se nt en ces an d th e co nd uc t am on gs t t he co de fen da nt s was no t ap pr eci ab ly di ffer en t.

The di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced Sal ga do to 12 -m on th s’ im pr is on m en t to ru n

co ns ecu ti ve ly to Sal ga do ’s se nt en ce fo r th e un rel at ed cr i me. Sal ga do ti m el y ap pe al ed

.

II

“ W e ap pl y an ab us e-o f-d is cret io n st an da rd to rev ie w th e su bs ta nt iv e

reas on ab le ne ss of a se nt en ce.” Uni te d St at es v. Garci a, 77 4 F.3d 47 2, 47 6 (8t h Cir. 20 14 ) (p er cu ria m ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. San do va l-S ia nu qu i, 63 2 F.3 d 43 8, 44 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 )). Sal ga do arg ue s hi s se nt en ce is su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le be cau se it is gr eat er th an ne ces sa ry to co m pl y wit h th e pu rp os es of se ct io n 35 53 (a) in li gh t of th e ti m e Sal ga do sp en t i n s ol it ary co nf in em en t. We dis ag ree.

A di st ric t co ur t’s se nt en ce i s su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le “ whe n it fai ls to

co ns id er a rel ev an t fact or , gi ve s si gn ifi can t weig ht to an irr el ev an t or im pr op er fact or ,
or co ns id ers on ly a pp ro pr ia te fact or s bu t ne ve rth el es s co m m it s a cl ear erro r of jud gm en t by arri vi ng at a se nt en ce th at li es ou ts id e th e l i mi te d ran ge of ch oi ce di ct at ed by th e fact s of th e cas e.” Uni te d St at es v. Fren ch
, 71 9 F.3 d 10 02
, 10 09 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Jo ne s, 50 9 F.3 d 91 1, 91 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 )). Non e of th es e ci rcu m st an ces is p r e s e n t he re. At se nt en ci ng , th e di st ric t co ur t ex pr es sl y

co ns id ered al l of th e s e c t i o n 35 53 (a) fact or s, th e at to rn ey s’ arg um en ts , an d th e ad vi so ry Gui de li ne s. Fu rth er, th e di st ric t co ur t co ns ider ed Salg ad o’s se nt en ce in li gh t of th e se nt en ces rece iv ed by Sa lg ad o’s co de f e n da nt s an d de te rm in ed a co ns ecu ti ve

se nt en ce av oi de d un warra nt ed se n t e nc in g di sp ari ti es be twee n co de fen da nt s who se

co nd uc t was no t ap pr eci ab ly di ffer en t. See 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a)( 6) (n ot in g th e ne ed

to av oi d u nwa rran te d d is pa rit ie s among de fen da nt s)

.

-3

-Sal ga do arg ue s th e ti m e h e al le ge dl y sp en t i n s ol it ary co nf

in em en t s ho ul d b e

a m it ig at in g fact or warra nt in g a co ns ecu ti ve se nt en ce. Eve n if th e reco rd co nt ai ne d 2

su ffi ci en t ev id en ce su bs ta nt ia ti ng th e ti m e Sal ga do al le ge dl y sp en t in s o l i t a ry

co nf in e m en t, “ a se nt en ci ng co ur t ha s wid e la ti tu de to weig h th e se ct io n 35 53 (a) fact or s in each cas e an d as si gn so m e fact or s gr eat e r w e i g ht th an ot he rs .” Uni te d St at es v. Ro be rts , 74 7 F.3 d 99 0, 99 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ) (q uo ti n g U n i te d St at es v. Loz oya, 62 3 F.3 d 62 4, 62 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 )). Here th e di st ric t co ur t co ns id ered Sal ga do ’s req ue st rel at in g to so li ta ry co nf in em en t an d to ru n hi s s e n te nc e

co nc ur ren tl y , bu t ga ve m or e weig ht to th e se nt en ces im po se d on Sal ga do ’s

co de fen da nt s. Giv en th is e x p l a n a ti on , th e di st ric t co ur t ad eq ua te ly co ns id ered th e

se ct io n 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s an d S al ga do ’s sen te nc e is su bs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le

.

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af fir m th e d is tri ct co ur t.

GRUENDER, Circ ui t J ud ge , con cu rri ng

.

I co nc ur in th e ju d g m en t an d th e op in io n of th e co ur t ex cep t fo r fo ot no te 2, whi ch I co ns id er u nn eces sa ry to res ol ve th is cas e.

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

So li ta ry co nf in em en t can be de tri m en ta l to th e m en ta l he al th of i nm at es an d 2 sh ou ld be us ed sp ari ng ly, if at al l. See, e.g ., El iz ab et h Ben ni on , Ban ni ng th e Bi ng : W hy Ext rem e So li ta ry Co nf in em en t Is Cru el an d Far Too Usu al Pu ni sh m en t, 90 In d. L.J. 74 1, 75 3- 63 (2 01 5) (d is cu ss in g sc ie nt ifi c st ud ie s on th e effe ct s of is ol at io n on th e br ai n, b od y , and be ha vi or ).

-4

-