T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptunderthe doctr i nes of * law o f th e c a se , res ju d ica ta, a n d c o llate ra l es to p p e l. Itm a yb e c ited , h o w e v e r, f o r its per s uas i ve val ue cons i s t entw i t h Fed. R . A pp. P. 32. 1 and 10th C i r . R . 32. 1.

## F I LED Unite d St at e s C ourt o f Appe als Te nt h Ci r c uit 

### Ju n e 7, 2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA , Pl ai nt i ff- A ppel l ee, v. N o. 07- 1018 GEO RG E C. W HI TE, D e f e n d a n t-A p p e llan t. ( D. C. No . 0 6 - CR - 2 7 5 - M S K) ( D . C ol or ado)

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efor e B R I S C O E , E B E L , and M c CO NNELL , C i rcui tJudg es.

A ft erexami ni ng t he br i efs and appe l l at e r ecor d, thi s panel has det erm i ned u n a n im o u slyth a t o ra l ar g u m e n t w o u ld n o t m a ter iallya ss ist in th e d e ter m in a tio n o f th is appea l . See Fed. R . A pp. P. 34( a) ( 2) ; 10th C i r . R . 34. 1( G ) . T he ca s e i s , ther efor e, o rd e re d s u b m itte d w ith o u t o ra l a rg u m e n t. G eor ge W hi t e ( “W hi t e”) w as i ndi ct ed on mul t i pl e chi l d por nogr aphyoffe ns es and ent er ed i nt o a pl ea a gr eementw i t h t he governm ent . O n appea l , he cl ai m s the governm ent- 2-

br eac hed the t erm s of thi s pl ea a gr eementbyadvoca t i ng a t en- y eart erm of s upervi s ed re lea se . W e h a v e ju risd ictio n p u rsu a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 a n d re m a n d w ith d ire c tio n s to vaca t e W hi t e’ s s ent ence and r es ent ence befor e a di ffe r entj udge. I. I n J ul yof 2006, W hi t e w as i ndi ct ed on t en count s of r ece i ptof chi l d por nogr aphy th ro u g h in te rs ta te c o m m e rc e b yc o m p u te r o r o th e r m e a n s in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 2252A ( a) ( 2) ( B ) and one c ountof pos s es s i on of chi l d por nogr aphyr ece i ved thr ough in te rs ta te c o m m e rc e b yc o m p u te r o r o th e r m e a n s in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 2252A ( a) ( 5) ( B ) . W hi t e ent er ed i nt o a pl ea a gr eementw i t h t he governm entand pl ed gui l tyt o s i x count s of w i l l ful and know i ng r ece i ptof chi l d por nogr aphyi n vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 2252A ( a) ( 2) ( B ) . I n excha nge, the governm entagr eed t o “r ecomm end t o t he C our tt hatdefe ndantbe s ent ence d t o the bot t om of the gui del i ne r ange, ” di s m i s s the r emai ni ng count s , and r ecomm end a thr ee- l evel r educt i on foracc ept ance of re s p o n s ib ility. R e c o rd o n A p p e a l, ( “ R O A ” ), V o l. I , D o c . 2 2 a t 1 -2 . A pr es ent ence r epor t( “PSR ”) w as pr epar ed and r ecomm ended a s ent ence of 121 m onths ’ i m pr i s onm entt o be fol l ow ed bys i x y ear s of s upervi s ed r el eas e. I d. , V ol . I V at R - 1, SA - 1. W hi t e had a cat egoryI cr i m i nal hi s t ory . I d. T he advi s orygui del i ne r ange s ugges t ed a s ent ence of 121 t o 151 m ont hs ’ i m pr i s onm entand a s upervi s ed r el eas e per i od o f tw o y e a rs to lif

e . Id . A t W h ite’s se n ten c in g h e a rin g , the c o u rt a n n o u n c e d its in ten tio n to se n ten c e W h ite to 1 2 1 m o n th s’ im p riso n m e n t to b e f o llo w e d b yten y e a rs o f su p e rv ise d re lea se . Id ., V o l.- 3-

I I I at24. T he governm entr es ponded thati tr ecomm ended 121 mont hs percountt o be s erved conc ur r ent l yand al s o s t at ed that“w e have no obj ect i on t o t he C our t ’ s i m pos i t i on o f a 1 0 -y ea r t erm o f su p erv ised release . ” Id . at 25 . W h it e’s c o u n sel arg u ed that six y ea rs of s upervi s ed r el eas e w oul d be s uffi ci entand thata t en- y earper i od w oul d be “unnec es s aryand unr eas onabl e i n l i ghtof the ci r cumst ance s . ” I d. T he governm ent re sp o n d e d th a t ten y e a rs o f su p e rv ise d re lea se w a s a p p ro p ria te in lig h t o f stip u late d f

a c ts i n the pl ea a gr eement . W hi t e’ s couns el ar gued thatthe governm ent ’ s s uppor tof a t eny ea r t erm o f su p erv ised release see m ed inap p rop ri ate in li g h t of the g o v ern m en t’ s pr om i s e t o r ecomm end a s ent ence atthe l ow end of the advi s oryr ange, butcouns el added thatW hi t e di d nots eek t o w i t hdr aw hi s pl ea. T he governm entr es ponded thati tdi d not bel i eve the pl ea a gr eementi ncl uded a r ecomm endat i on r egar di ng s upervi s ed r el eas e. T he di s tr i ctcourts ent ence d W hi t e t o 121 m ont hs ’ i m pr i s onm entand t en y ear s of s upervi s ed re le a s e . II. “A cl ai m t hatt he governm enthas br eac hed a pl ea a gr eementi s a ques t i on of l aw w e r evi ew de novo, even w her e the def endantfai l ed t o obj ectatthe t i m e of the al l eged b re a c h .” U n ited S tate s v . R o d rig u e z -D e lm a , 4 5 6 F .3 d 1 2 4 6 , 1 2 5 0 (1 0 th C ir. 2 0 0 6 ), ce rt. deni ed, 127 S. C t . 1338 ( 2007) . T o det erm i ne w hethera br eac h has occurr ed, w e “1) ex am ine th e n ature o f th e p rom ise; an d 2 ) ev alua te th e p rom ise i n li g h t of the d ef en d an t’ s r eas onabl e under s t andi ng of the pr om i s e atthe t i m e of the gui l t ypl ea. ” I d. ( ci t at i ons om i t t ed) . “G ener al pr i nci pl es of contr actl aw defi ne the governm ent ’ s obl i gat i ons under- 4-

the ag reem ent, l oo king t o the exp res s l ang uag e and con strui ng anyam bigui t i es agai nst the governm entas t he dr aft erof the agr eement . ” I d. at1250- 51. W hi t e ar gues t hatt he governm entbr eac hed the pl ea a gr eementbyr ecomm endi ng a term o f su p erv ised release w ell o v er the g u ideline m inim u m b ec au se th e w o rd “sent ence” i n a p l ea agreem ent encom passes not onl ythe term of im pri sonm ent, bu tal so th e ter m o f

su p e rv ise d re lea se . S e e U n ited S tate s v . S a n d o v a l, 47 7 F .3 d 1 2 0 4 , 1 2 0 7 (1 0 th C i r . 2007) ( fi ndi ng t hats upervi s ed- r el eas e condi t i ons ar e partof “s ent ence ” i n cont extof a p p e l l a t e w a i v e ri n p l e a a g r e e m e n t ) . W h i t e r e q u e s t s a r e m a n d f o rr e s e n t e n c i n g b y a d if f e re n t ju d g e . W hi t e’ s pl ea a gr eements t at ed thatthe governm entw oul d “r ecomm end t o t he C our tt hatdefe ndantbe s ent ence d t o the bot t om of the gui del i ne r ange onc e thatr ange has been de t erm i ned byt he C our t . ” R O A , V ol . I , D oc. 22 at2. T he governm ent conce des thati tbr eac hed the pl ea a gr eementbeca us e thi s l anguage i s ambi guous and m us tbe cons t rued aga i ns tt he governm entas the dr aft erof the document . T he g o v e rn m e n t als o a g re e s w ith W h ite th a t a r e m a n d f o r re se n ten c in g b ya d if f e re n t ju d g e is a n a p p r o p r i a t e r e m e d y. A s couns el has ar gued, w e have hel d t hatthe appr opr i at e r emedyfora br eac h of a pl ea a gr eementbyt he governm enti s ei t herw i t hdr aw al of the pl ea a gr eementor r es ent enci ng befor e a di ffe r entj udge. See U ni t ed St at es v. B r y e, 146 F. 3d 1207, 1213 ( 1 0 th Ci r . 1 9 9 8 ) ; Un i t e d S t a t e s v . Ha wl e y , 9 3 F . 3 d 6 8 2 , 6 9 3 - 9 4 ( 1 0 t h Ci r . 1 9 9 6 ) . As W hi t e does nots eek t o w i t hdr aw hi s pl ea, w e w i l l pr ovi de the al t ernat i ve r emedyof- 5-

re se n ten c in g b e f

o re a d if f e re n t ju d g e . W e f

u rth e r a d d th a t th is re m e d yis n o t in ten d e d to refl ecti n an yw ayup on the fa i rness of the sent encing j ud ge w ho se act i on s di d n ot cause th is re s u lt. III . W e R E M A N D w i t h di r ect i ons t o vaca t e W hi t e’ s s ent ence and r es ent ence befor e a d if f e re n t ju d g e . E n tered fo r th e C o u rt M aryB eck Bri s coe C i r cui tJ udge