FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT N ove m be r 2, 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. 06- 13241 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 4 3 - CR- 4 - SPM 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 J A M E S D . G O R D O N , 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 N orthe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 2, 2006) B efo re T JO F L A T , B A R K E T T an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: J a m e s D . G o r d o n ap p e a ls h is s e n te n c e f o llo w in g h is g u ilty p le ato c ons pi r a c y t o di s tr i but e a nd pos s e s s w i th the i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e m or e tha n 5002

g r a ms o f ami x tu r e c o n t a i n i n g “ M D M A ” o r“ e c s t a s y , ” i n v i o l a t i o n o f 2 1 U . S. C. § § 8 4 1 (b )(1 )(B )(i i ) an d (C ) an d 8 4 6 , an d p o ssessi n g a fi rearm an d am m u n i t i o n as a conv i ct ed fe l on , i n v i ol at i on of 18 U . S . C . §§ 92 2(g) and 9 24 (a )( 2). G ordo n w as se nt ence d as acare eroffe nd erbase d o n h i s pri or conv i ct i on s f or aggravat ed batt ery w i th a deadl y w eapo n and carryi ng a c on ce al ed fi re arm . O n app ea l , G ordo n argues tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d i n c l a s s i f y i ng hi m a s ac a r e e rof

f e nde rbe c aus e the se nt ence for hi s a gg ra vat ed batt ery c on vi ct i on w as i m po se d m ore than 1 5 years before c om m ence m entof the i nst antoffe nse. H e f urther a rgues thatthree cr i m i nal hi s t ory poi nt s s houl d be de duc t e d f r om hi s c r i m i na l hi s t ory s c or e be c aus e the a g g r a v a te d b a tte ry c o n v ic tio n s h o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n c o u n te d . A di stri ctcourt ’ s dec i si on t o cl as si fya def endantas a c ar ee r off

ender und er U . S . S . G . § 4B 1. 1 i s r e vi e w e d de novo. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. G i bs on, 434 F . 3d 1234, 1 2 4 3 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , c e rt. d e n ie d , 1 2 6 S .C t. 2 9 1 1 ( 2 0 0 6 ) . P u r s u a n t to § 4 B 1 .1 , a de f e nda nti s ac a r e e rof

f e nde rw he n: ( 1) the de f

e nda ntw a s a tl e a s te i ght e e n y e a r s ol d a tthe t i m e the de f e nda ntc om m i tt e d the i ns t a ntof f e ns e of c onvi c t i on; ( 2) the i ns t a nt offe nse of c on vi ct i on i s afe l on y thati s e i ther acr i m e of vi ol ence or a c o n tr o l l e d s u b s t a n c e o f

f e n s e ; a n d ( 3 ) th e d e f

e n d a n th a s a tl e a s ttwo pri or fe l on y c on vi ct i on s of e i ther acr i m e of vi ol ence or a c on trol l ed subst ance offe nse. U .S .S .G . § 4 B 1 .1 ( a ) .3

P r i orf e l ony c onvi c t i ons unde r§ 4B 1. 1 a r e c ount e d us i ng the de f i ni t i ons a nd i ns truc t i ons f

orc om put i ng c r i m i na l hi s t ory i n § 4A 1. 2. U . S . S . G . § 4B 1. 2, c o m m e n t n .3 ; s e e U n ite d S ta te s v . S h a n n o n , 4 4 9 F .3 d 1 1 4 6 , 1 1 4 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . A p r io rc o n v ic tio n is “a n y s e n te n c e p r e v io u s ly im p o s e d u p o n a d ju d ic a tio n o f

g u ilt .

. . for c on du ctno tpartof the i nst antoffe nse. ” U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 2(a) (1); se e S ha nnon, 449 F . 3d a t1148. A pr i orc onvi c t i on c ount s onl y i f “ i m pr i s onm e nt e xc e e di ng one y e a ra nd one m onth . . . w a s i m pos e d w i thi n f i f t e e n y e a r s of

the de f e nda nt ’ s c om m e nc e m e ntof the i ns t a ntof

f e ns e [ . ] ” U . S . S . G . § 4A 1. 2( e ) ( 1) ( e m pha s i s a dde d) . I n the c ont e xtof ac ons pi r a c y , how e ve r , w e c ountba c k f r om th e d at e l astal l eg ed as p arto f th e co n sp i racy, u n l ess th e d i stri ctco u rtm ak es a s p e c if ic f in d in g c o n c e rn in g w h e n th e c o - c o n s p ir a to r s r e a c h e d a n a g r e e m e n t. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C ornog, 945 F . 2d 1504, 1509- 10 ( 11th C i r . 1991) . A pr i or c onvi c t i on a l s o c ount s w he n “ a ny pr i ors e nt e nc e of i m pr i s onm e nte xc e e di ng one y e a ra nd one m onth, w he ne ve ri m pos e d, . . . r e s ul t e d i n the de f e nda ntbe i ng i ncar ce ra t ed du ri ng any partof such fi ft ee n-ye arperi od . ” U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 2(e) (1); s e e S h a n n o n , 4 4 9 F .3 d a t 1 1 4 8 .

“ S e nt e nc e s i m pos e d upon r e voc a t i on of pr oba t i on c a n a f

f e c tthe t i m e pe r i od unde rw hi c h s e nt e nc e s a r e c ount e d unde rs e c t i on 4A 1. 2( e ) ( 1) . ” S ha nnon, 449 F . 3d a t 1 1 4 8 ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n s o m itte d ) . “T h u s , th e c o u rt o r d in a r ily s h o u ld c o u n t a4

c onvi c t i on tha ti s i m pos e d, a nd on w hi c h the de f e nda nti s pa r ol e d, out s i de the w i ndow , w he n the de f

e nda ntl a t e r - w i thi n the w i ndow - i s i nc a r c e r a t e d f orbr e a c hi ng the c ondi t i ons of

hi s pa r ol e . ” I d. I n S ha nnon, S ha nnon c om m i tt e d tw o pr i or fe l on y off

ense s out si de the 15 -y ear w i nd ow , bu tvi ol at ed hi s probat i on for e ac h o f f e n s e , r e s u ltin g in in c a r c e r a tio n f o re a c h o f

f e n s e , w ith in th e 1 5 - y e a rp e r io d . I d . W e he l d tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtc orr e c t l y appl i e d the gui de l i ne s i n s e nt e nc i ng S hann on as a c ar ee r off ender because both o f S hann on ’ s pri or conv i ct i on s r es ul t ed i n hi m be i ng i nc a r c e r a t e d w i thi n the 15- y e a rw i ndow f orpr i orof

f e ns e s . I d. H e r e , be c aus e the i ns t a ntof f e ns e i nvol ve d ac ons pi r a c y , the 15- y e a rw i ndow for pri or offe nses op ened on the l as tdat e of the al l eged conspi ra cy , w hi ch w as M ay 2 0 , 2 0 0 5 . A l th o u g h G o rd o n w as co n v i ct ed o f th e ag g rav at ed b att ery o ffen se i n Jun e 198 9, ou t si de the 15 -y ear w i nd ow for pre di ca t e c ar ee r off ender c o n v ic tio n s , G o r d o n ’s p r o b a tio n w a s r e v o k e d , a n d h e w a s in c ar c e r a te d u n til J a n u a ry 2 9 , 1 9 9 3 , w h ic h w a s w ith in th e 1 5 - y e a rw in d o w . T h e r e f o r e , p u r s u a n t to U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 2(e) (1), because G ordo n w as i ncar ce ra t ed w i thi n the 15 -y ear w i nd ow for vi ol at i ng hi s probat i on w i th res pectt o h i s 198 9 agg ra vat ed batt ery c onvi c t i on, tha tc onvi c t i on c ount s a s apr i orvi ol e ntf e l ony f orpurpos e s of

the care eroffe nd erprov i si on . G ordo n’ s argum entconcerni ng the appl i cabl e c ri m i nal h is to ry p o in ts is m o o t b e c au s e , a s d is c u s s e d ab o v e , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tly5

appl i ed the ca re eroffe nd erenhancem entand p roperl y i ncl ud ed the aggravat ed b a tte ry c o n v ic tio n in h is c r im in a l h is to ry s c o r e . A c c o r d in g ly , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t e rrin s e n te n c in g G o r d o n a s ac a r e e ro f f e n d e r . G or don a l s o a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d i n i m pos i ng agui de l i ne - r a nge se nt ence because the se nt ence do es no tre fl ec thi s true c on du ct . G ordo n further c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourti m pos e d the s e nt e nc e unde ram a nda t ory gui de l i ne s c he m e , i n vi ol a t i on of

U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . 220, 125 S . C t . 738, 160 L .E d .2 d 6 2 1 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . W e ha ve he l d tha t“ [ i ] n r e vi e w i ng the ul t i m a t e s e nt e nc e i m pos e d by the d is tr ic t c o u rt f

o rr e a s o n ab le n e s s , w e c o n s id e rth e f in a l s e n te n c e , in its e n tir e ty , in lig h t o f th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s .” U n ite d S ta te s v . M a rtin , 4 5 5 F .3 d 1 2 2 7 , 1 2 3 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) ( b r a c k e ts in o r ig in a l) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . I n d e te rm in in g ar e a s o n ab le s e nt e nc e , the di s tr i c tc ourti s t o be gui de d by the § 3553( a ) f a c t or s . B ooke r , 543 U . S . a t261, 125 S . C t . a t765- 66; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. W i ni nge a r , 422 F . 3d 1241, 1246 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). S ec t i on 35 53 (a ) provi des thatdi stri ctcourt s m ustconsi der, i nt er a l i a , ( 1) the appl i c abl e gui de l i ne r a nge ; ( 2) the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e ; ( 3) the hi s t ory a nd c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s of the de f e nda nt ; ( 4) the ne e d f

orthe s e nt e nc e i m pos e d t o r e f l e c tthe s e r i ous ne s s of

the of f e ns e , t o pr om ot e r e s pe c tf or th e la w , a n d to p r o v id e ju s t p u n is h m e n t f o rth e o f f e n s e ; ( 5 ) th e n e e d f

o ra d e q u a te6

det erre nce; (6) prot ec t i on of the pu bl i c; and (7) the need t o avo i d u nw arrant ed s e n te n c in g d is p a r itie s . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 7 ) . A lth o u g h th e d is tr ic t c o u rt m u s t b e g u id e d b y th e s e f a c to r s , w e h a v e h e ld tha t“ nothi ng i n B ooke rore l s e w he r e r e qui r e s the di s tr i c tc ourtt o s t a t e on the reco rd th ati th as ex p l i ci t l y co n si d ered each o f th e § 3 5 5 3 (a) factors o r t o d i scu ss e a c h o f th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s .” U n ite d S ta te s v . S c o tt, 4 2 6 F .3 d 1 3 2 4 , 1 3 2 9 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2005) . “ [ A ] n a c know l e dgm e ntby the di s tr i c tc ourttha ti tha s c ons i de r e d the defe nd ant ’ s argum ent s and the fa ct ors i n sec t i on 35 53 (a ) i s s uffi ci entun der B ooke r . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. T a l l e y , 431 F . 3d 784, 786 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . A l though a s e n t e n c e wi th i n th e a d v i s o ry g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e i s n o tp e rs e r e a s o n ab l e , we o r d in ar ily e x p e c t s u c h as e n te n c e to b e r e a s o n ab le . I d . a t 7 8 7 - 8 8 . W e r e c e n tly h e ld th a t “ad is tr ic t c o u rt m a y d e te rm in e , o n ac a s e - b y - c a s e b a s is , th e w e ig h t to gi ve the G ui de l i ne s , s o l ong a s tha tde t e rm i na t i on i s m a de w i th r e f e r e nc e t o the r e m a i ni ng s e c t i on 3553( a ) f a c t or s tha tthe c ourtm us ta l s o c ons i de ri n c a l c ul a t i ng the defendant ’ s s ent ence . ” U ni t ed S t at es v. H un t , 45 9 F . 3d 11 80 , 11 85 (11th C i r. 2006) . T he bur de n of

e s t abl i s hi ng tha tthe s e nt e nc e i s unr e a s onabl e i n l i ghtof the r e c o r d a n d th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s lie s w ith th e p a rty c h a lle n g in g th e s e n te n c e . T a lle y , 4 3 1 F .3 d a t 7 8 8 .7

A s aprel i m i narym att er , G ordo n’ s c on t ent i on thatthe di stri ctcourt se nt ence d h i m un der am andat ory gui del i ne sc hem e i s w i tho utm er i t . G ordo n w as s e n te n c e d a f

te rB o o k e r , a n d th e c o u rt e x p lic itly s ta te d th a t th e g u id e lin e s w e r e o n ly a d v is o ry . F urther, G ordo n fai l ed t o carryhi s burden o f s ho w i ng thathi s s ent ence s w e r e unr e a s onabl e . H e r e , the r e c or d r e ve a l s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourta de qua t e l y a nd pr ope r l y c ons i de r e d the § 3553( a ) s e nt e nc i ng f a c t or s a s w e l l the a dvi s ory gui de l i ne rang e i n sent enci ng G ordo n. F i rs t , as i n S cott , the di stri ctcourtexpl i ci t l y s t at ed th a t it h a d c o n s id e r e d th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s . S e c o n d , th e c o u rt d e m o n s tr a te d its ex p li cit co n sid er atio n o f m an y o f th e s en ten cin g fa cto rs , i n clu d in g (1 ) G o rd o n ’s hi s t ory a nd c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s , ( 2) the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e , ( 3) the n e e d f o rth e s e n te n c e im p o s e d to r e f le c t th e s e r io u s n e s s o f

th e o f f e n s e , p r o m o te r e s pe c tf orthe l a w , a nd pr ovi de j us tpuni s hm e nta nd a de qua t e de t e rr e nc e , a nd ( 4) the pol i c y s t a t e m e nt s i s s ue d by the S e nt e nc i ng C om m i s s i on. T he c ourtdi d not ne e d t o s t a t e on the r e c or d i t s e xpl i c i tc ons i de r a t i on of e ve ry § 3553( a ) f

a c t or , nor di d i tne e d t o a ddr e s s e ve ry a r gum e ntf orava r i a nc e . T hi r d, G or don’ s a s s e rt i on th a t h e h a s n o t m a in ta in e d th e lif e o f ac a r e e rc r im in a l is w ith o u t m e r it b e c au s e h is c r i m i na l r e c or d i s s e r i ous a nd s pa ns m a ny y e a r s . F i na l l y , the c ourti m pos e d se nt ence s a tthe l ow end o f the gu i del i ne ra ng e, and, for the re as on s di sc usse d8

abov e, no thi ng i n the re cord sugg es t s thatthe l ow -e nd se nt ence s w er e u n r e a s o n ab le . U p o n rev i ew o f th e reco rd o n ap p eal an d co n si d erat i o n o f th e p art i es’ b ri efs, w e di sc ern n o revers i bl e e rr or. AF F I RME D.