# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 44 36

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

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.

Hug o B arry T ho m

ps on , Jr.,

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 M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 13 , 20 17

Fi le d: Apri l 2 0, 2 01 8

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re COLLOTON, MELLOY , and GRUENDER, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

COLLOTON, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

Hug o Tho m

ps on ch al le ng es se ve n spec ial co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e th at

th e di st ric t co ur t im

po se d aft er rev ok in g Tho m ps on ’s s u p erv is ed rel eas e an d

im po si ng a ne w se nt en ce. Tho m ps on arg ue s fo r th e fir st ti m e on ap pe al t h a t th edi st ric t co ur t im posed the co ndi tio ns w ith out m ak ing in di vi du al iz ed fin di ng s an d th at 1

th e co nd it io ns are in co ns is te nt wit h 18 U.S.C. § 35 83 (d ). W e co nc lu de th at th ere was

no pl ai n e rro r an d a ffi rm

th e jud gm en t.

I.

In 20 07

, a jury fo un d Tho m ps on gu il ty of co ns pi racy to po ss es s wit h th e in te nt

to di st rib ut e fif

ty ki lo gr am s or m or e of m a r i ju a n a , i n vi ol at io n of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 84 1( a)(1 ) a n d 84 6. The di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced Tho m ps on to 96 m on th s’

im pr is on m en t, t o b e fo ll owe d b y a th ree- y ear t erm

of s up erv is ed rel eas e.

W hi le on su pe rv is ed rel eas e, Tho m ps on pl ead ed gu il ty in st at e co ur t to se xu al

m is co nd uc t in vo lv in g a ch il d by in de cen t exp os ur e. At a he ari ng be fo re th e di st ric t

co ur t on a pe ti ti on to rev ok e su pe rv is ed rel eas e, Tho m ps o n a d mi tt ed th at he ha d

pl ead ed gu il ty to th e se xu al m is co nd uc t of fen se

. The co ur t fo un d th at Tho m ps on ha d

vi ol at ed a co nd it io n of s up erv is ed rel eas e th at pro hi bi te d h im fro m co m m it ti ng an y

ne w fed eral

, st at e, or lo cal cri m e. Tho m ps on al so ad m it te d two m or e vi ol at io ns :

as so ci at in g wit h a co nv ic te d fel on an d fai li ng to no ti fy hi s pr ob at io n of fic er wit hi n

se ve nt y -two ho ur s of hi s co nt act wit h la w en fo rcem en t du rin g th e se xu al m is co nd uc t

in ve st ig at io n.

The d i s t r i ct co ur t rev ok ed Tho m ps on ’s te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e an d

se nt en ced hi m to 18 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, to be fol lo wed by an 18 -m on th ter m of

su pe rv is ed rel eas e. The co ur t al so im po se d te n sp eci al co nd it io ns on Tho m ps on ’s

su pe rv is ed rel eas e, se ve n o f whi ch he ch al le ng es on ap pe al

.

The Hon or ab le Caro l E. Ja ck so n, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1

Dis tri ct of M is so ur i, n ow re ti red

.

-2

-II.

Be c a us e Tho m

ps on di d no t ob

ject to th e sp eci al co nd it io ns at hi s rev oc at io n

h e ari ng , we rev ie w fo r pl ai n erro r. Uni te d St at es v. Dav is

, 45 2 F.3 d 99 1, 99 4 ( 8 t h

Ci r. 20 06 ). To ob ta in rel ie f un de r th is st a n d a r d

, Tho m ps on m us t sh ow th at th e

di st ric t co ur t m ad e an ob vi ou s erro r th at affe ct ed hi s su bs ta nt ia l rig ht s an d se rio us ly

affe ct ed th e f

a i r n es s, in te gr it y or pu bl ic rep ut at io n of jud ic ia l pr oc eed in gs

. Se e

Uni te d S ta te s v. Ol an o , 50 7 U.S. 7 25 , 73 2 (1 99 3)

.

U n de r 18 U.S.C. § 35 83 (d ), a di st ric t co ur t ha s br oa d di sc ret io n to or de r a

co nd it io n o f su pe rv is ed rel eas e, so lo ng as it is reas on ab ly relat ed to th e se nt en ci ng

fact or s se t fo rth in 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a), in vo lv es no gr eat er de pr iv at io n of li be rty th an

is reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry , an d is co ns is te nt wit h an y pe rti ne nt po li cy st at em en ts is su ed

by th e Sen te nc in g Com m is si on

. Uni te d St at es v. Mar k

, 42 5 F.3d 50 5, 50 7 (8t h Cir.

20 05 ). The pu r po se s se t fo rth in § 35 53 (a) in cl ud e “ de te rren ce, pr ot ect io n of th e

pu bl ic

, an d effe ct iv e pr ov is io n, in th e m os t effe ct iv e m an ne r, of ne ed ed ed uc at io na l

or vo cat io na l tra in in g, m ed ic al care , or ot he r co rrec ti on al tre at m en t to th e de fen da nt .”

Id

.

Tho m

ps on arg ue s th at th e di st ric t c o u r t im po se d th e ch al le ng ed co nd it io ns

wit ho ut pr ov id in g a su ffi ci en t ex pl an at io n of ho w th e co nd it io ns sa ti sf ie d th e

req ui rem en ts of § 35 83 (d ). Fo r th e reas on s di sc us se d be lo w, we co nc lu de th at th ere

was no pl ai n erro r warra nt in g rel ie f. Alt ho ug h we e n c o u r a g e “ de ta il ed in di vi du al

fin di ng s, whe re th e ba si s fo r th e sp eci al co nd it io n can be di sc ern ed fro m th e reco rd

, th e c o n d i t i on ne ed no t be va cat ed .” Uni te d St at es v. Har t

, 82 9 F.3 d 60 6, 60 9 (8 th

Ci r. 20 16 ). On th is reco rd

, Tho m ps on can n o t m eet hi s bu rd en to sh ow th at th e

di st ric t co ur t m ad e an ob vi ou s erro r th at cau se d pr ejud ic e an d a m is carr ia ge of jus ti ce.

W e d is cu ss th e ch al le ng ed co nd it io ns se ri at im

.

-3

-A.

Spec ia l Condi tio n 2: The defe nd an t sh al l part ic ip at e in an ev al ua ti on

to de te rm in e if se x of

fen se sp eci fic tre at m en t is ne ed ed

, an d if so , th e de fen da nt sh al l pa rti ci pa te in a se x- of fen se sp eci fic tre at m en t pr og ram

. The de fen da nt sh al l en te r, co op erat e, an d co m pl et e sa id pr og ram un ti l

rel eas ed by th e pr o b a t io n of fic e. Dur in g th e co ur se of sa id tre at m en t,
th e de fen da nt sh al l be su bj e c t t o pe rio di c an d ran do m ph y si ol og ic al

te st in g whi ch m ay in cl ud e bu t is no t li m it ed to po lygrap h te st in g an d/ or

ot he r sp eci al iz ed ass es sm en t i ns tru m en ts

.

Co nd it io n 2 req ui res Tho m ps on to pa rti ci pa te in an ev al ua tio n fo r a se x- of fen se

tre at m en t pr og ram an d to pa rti ci pa te in a tre at m en t pr og ram as ne ed ed

. The co nd it io n

al so di rect s Tho m

ps on to su bm it to ph y si ol og ic al t e s t i ng du rin g tre at m en t.

Tho mp so n arg ue s th at th is co nd it io n is no t reas on ab ly rel at ed to hi s of fen se of

co nv ic ti on or h is hi st or y

an d c ha ract eri st ic s.

Alt ho ug h Co nd iti on 2 is not re la te d to Tho m ps on ’s dr ug tra ffi ck in g co nv ic ti on ,

a se nt en ci ng co ur t “ can im po se sp eci al co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e no t di rect ly

rel at ed to th e o ffen se for whi ch th e de fen da nt is be in g sen te nc ed whe re ‘ th e sp eci al

co nd it io ns are rel at ed to an ot he r of fen se th at th e de fen da nt pr ev io us ly co m m it te d.’”

Uni te d St at es v. Kel ly

, 62 5 F.3 d 5 1 6

, 5 19 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v.

Sma rt

, 47 2 F.3 d 5 5 6

, 5 5 9 ( 8t h Ci r. 20 06 )). The co ur t rev ok ed Tho m ps on ’s

su pe rv is ed rel eas e an d im po se d th e ch al le n g e d co nd it io ns aft er Tho m ps on pl ead ed

gu il ty to se xu al m is co nd uc t in vo lv in g a ch il d by in de ce nt ex po su re. Tho m ps on ’s

reco rd al so in cl ud es pr io r co nv ic ti on s fo r in de cen t or le wd act s wit h a ch il d un de r 16

ye a rs of ag e in 19 95 an d fai lu re to reg is te r as a se x of fen de r in 20 06

. G i v e n

Tho m ps on ’s pr io r se xu al m is co nd uc t, Co nd it io n 2’s requ ire m en t th at Tho m ps on be

ev al ua te d fo r se x- of

f e n s e tre at m en t an d pa rti ci pa te in tre at m en t as ne ed ed is

reas on ab ly rel at ed to hi s hi st or y an d ch arac te ris ti cs , an d to th e st at ut or y pu rp os es of

de te rren ce, p ro te ct io n o f th e p ub li c, an d c or rect io na l t reat m en t.

-4

-Tho m ps on co nt en ds th at Co nd it io n 2 im pe rm is si bl y de le ga te s jud ic ia l po wer

to th e pr ob at io n of

fic e “ be cau se th e of

fic e is al lo wed to de te rm in e th e ex te nt of hi s

pu ni sh m en t.” Bu t “ [c]on di ti on s de le ga ti ng li m it ed au th or it y to no n jud ic ia l of fic ia ls

su ch as pr ob at io n of

fic ers are pe rm is s i b l e so lo ng as th e de le ga ti ng jud ic ia l of fic er

ret ai ns an d ex erci se s ul ti m at e res po ns ib il it y .” Uni te d St at es v. Mic kel so n , 43 3 F.3 d

10 50

, 1 0 5 6 ( 8 t h Ci r. 20 06 ). Here, th e reco rd do es no t sh ow th at th e di st ric t co ur t

in te nd ed to rel in qu is h ul ti m at e res po ns ib il it y whe n it au th or iz ed th e pr ob at io n of fic e

to ov ers ee Tho m

ps on ’s se x- of

fen se tre at m en t. Tho m

ps on ha s reco ur se to th e di st ric t

co ur t if he ob

jects to th e di rect io n of th e pr ob at io n of fic e, an d th e co ur t’s li m it ed

de le ga ti on was p erm is si bl e.

Fi na ll y , Tho m

ps on arg ue s th at Co nd it io n 2 res ul ts in a “ gr eat er de pr iv at io n of

li be rty th an is reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry ,” be cau se it su bjec ts hi m to th e po ss ib il it y of

ph y si ol og ic al te st in g, in cl ud in g po lygrap h te st in g, du rin g th e co ur se of th e tre at m en t.

He co m pl ai ns th at he ha s no hi st or y of un tru th fu ln es s th at m ig ht jus ti f y s uc h a

co nd it io n. The co nd it io n, ho wev er, r e q u i r es su bm is si on to ph y si ol og ic al te st in g

“ [d ]urin g th e co ur se of

” se x- of fen se tre at m en t; it is no t a free st an di ng au th or iz at io n

to req ui re po lygrap h ex am in at io ns

. Giv en th at th e co ur t pr op erl y or de red se x- of fen se

tre at m en t as ne ed ed , Th om ps on ha s no t es ta bl is he d th at it was an ob vi ou s erro r fo r

t h e c o u r t to req ui re th at Tho m ps on su bm it to ph y si ol og ic al te st in g whe re it is a

co m po ne nt of t ha t t reat m en t.

B.

Spec ia l Con di tio n 4: The de fen da nt sh al l su bm it hi s pe rs on , res id en ce, of fic e , c o mp u t er, or ve hi cl e to a se arch

, co nd uc te d by th e pr ob at io n of fic e ba se d up on reas on ab le su sp ic io n o f co nt rab an d o r ev id en ce o f a

vi ol at io n of a co nd it io n of rel eas e. The de fen da nt sh al l warn an y ot he r

res id en ts th at th e pr em is es m ay be su bjec t to se arch es pu rs ua nt to th is

co nd it io n.

-5

-Th o mp so n ne xt ob jects to Co nd it io n 4, whi ch req ui res hi m to al lo w th e

pr ob at io n of

fic e t o s e a r c h hi s co m

pu te r if th ere is reas on ab le su sp ic io n th at

Tho m ps on po ss es se s co nt rab an d or ha s vi ol at ed a co nd it io n of rel eas e. Th o mp s o n

arg ue s th at th is co nd it io n is no t “ reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e pu rp os es of hi s su pe rv is ed

rel eas e” an d is ov erb ro ad

, be cau se no ne of hi s pa st vi ol at io ns ha ve in vo lv e d th e

po ss es si on or u se of a co m pu te r. Bu t § 35 83 (d ) ex pr es sl y au th or iz es th e co nd it io n.

The st at ut e pr ov id es th at a “ co ur t m ay or de r, as an ex pl ic it co nd it i o n o f su pe rv is ed

rel eas e fo r a pe r s o n w h o i s a fel on an d req ui red to reg is te r un de r th e Sex Offen de r Reg is tra ti on an d Not ifi cat io n Act,” th at th e pe rs on al lo w a pr ob at io n of fic er to se arch

hi s pr op ert y , in cl ud in g hi s co m pu te r, if th e of

fic er ha s “ rea s o n a b le su sp ic io n” of

un la wfu l co nd uc t or a vi ol at io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. 1 8 U .S.C. § 35 83 (d ).

Tho m ps on is a fel on who is req ui red to reg is te r as a se x of fen de r, se e 3 4 U

. S .C.

§§ 20 91 1, 20 91 3, so th e di st ric t co ur t di d n ot co m m it pl ai n erro r by im

po si ng a

co nd it io n t ha t i s p erm it te d b y § 3 58 3( d)

.

C.

Spec ia l Con di tio n 5: The de fen da nt sh al l be pr oh ib it ed fro m co nt act
wit h ch il dr en un de r th e ag e of 18 wit h o ut th e pr io r writ te n pe rm is si on of th e pr ob at io n of

fic e an d sh al l rep or t to th e pr ob at io n o f f i c e im m ed ia te ly, bu t in no ev en t la te r th an 24 ho ur s , a n y u na ut ho riz ed

co nt act wit h c hi ld ren un de r th e ag e o f 18

.

Spec ia l Con di tio n 6: The de fen da nt sh al l be pr oh ib it ed fro m en ga gi ng in an y oc cu pa ti on , bu si ne ss , pr of es si on , or vo lu nt eer wor k whe re he ha s

acce ss to ch il dr en un de r th e a ge of 18 wit ho ut pr io r writ te n ap pr ov al

fro m th e p ro ba ti on off

ic e.

Spec ia l Con di tio n 7: The de fen da nt sh al l no t freq ue nt

, lo it er, or res id e wit hi n 50 0 feet of sc ho ol s , p a r k s, pl ay gr ou nd s, arca de s, da y care faci li t i e s o r ot he r pl aces freq ue nt ed by ch il dr en un de r th e ag e of 18

, wit ho ut pri or writ te n a pp ro va l fr om th e p ro ba ti on off

ic e.

-6

-Co nd it io ns 5, 6, an d 7 res tri ct Tho mp s o n ’s free do m to co nt act an d as so ci at e

wit h m in or s. The y req ui re Tho m ps on to ob ta in writ te n per m is si on of th e pr ob at io n

of fic e be fo re he (1 ) ha s co nt act wit h ch il dr en un de r th e ag e of 18

, (2 ) en ga ge s in an y

oc cu pa ti on , bu si ne ss , pr of es si on , or vo lu nt eer wor k whe re he ha s “ acce ss to ” ch il dr en

un de r th e ag e of 18

, or (3 ) freq ue nt s, lo it ers , or res id es wit hi n 50 0 feet of a pl ace freq ue nt ed by chi ld ren un de r th e ag e o f 18

.

Tho m ps on arg ue s th at th es e co nd it io ns are va gu e an d ov erb ro ad

. He co nt en ds

th at th e reco rd do es no t sh ow th at he “ ha s a pr op en si ty to co m m it a se x offe ns e in a

pu bl ic pl ace.” He al so arg ue s Con di ti on 6’s req ui rem en t th at he no t en ga ge in “ an y

bu si ne ss ” whe re h e h as “ m ere a cces s t o c hi ld ren ” is “ pa ral y zi ng .”

W e ha ve up he ld ne arl y id en ti cal co nd it io ns in cas es in whi ch th e de fen da nt ha s

a hi st or y of se xu al ly ab us in g m in or s. In Uni te d St at es v. Si mon s , 61 4 F.3 d 47 5 (8 th

Ci r. 20 10 ), we affi rm ed th e im po si ti on of a co nd it io n t h a t pr oh ib it ed th e de fen da nt

“ fro m ha vi ng an y co nt act w i t h c h i ld ren un de r th e ag e of 18

, in cl ud in g hi s own

ch il dr en ,” wit ho ut pr ob at io n of fic e ap pr ov al

. Id

. at 48 1- 82

. S imo ns al so ap pr ov ed

a co nd it io n th at pro sc rib ed th e de fen da nt “ fro m co m in g wit hi n 50 0 feet of sc ho ol s,

pa rk s, p la y gr ou nd s, o r ot he r pl aces us ed pri m ari ly by ch il dr en un de r th e ag e o f 18 ”

wit ho ut pr ob at io n of

fic e ap pr ov al

. Id

. at 48 2- 83

. In Si mon s , th e de fen da nt ha d pr io r

co nv ic ti on s fo r at te m

pt ed in de cen t li be rti es wit h a ch il d an d fo r fir st -d eg ree rap e. Id

.

at 4 8 2

. W e co nc lu de d th at th e de fen da nt ’s hi st or y of co m m it ti ng cri m es ag ai ns t

ch il dr en ad eq ua te ly s up po rte d th e no -co nt act co nd i t i o n , an d th at “ a ba n on co m in g

ne ar pl aces whe re ch il dr en co ng reg at e is co ns is te nt wit h th e d is tri ct co ur t’s du ty t o

pr ot ect th e p ub li c fro m

Sim on s’s fu tu re cri m es .” Id.

In Un i t e d St at es v. Th omp so n , 65 3 F.3 d 68 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ), we up he ld a

co nd it i o n th at pr oh ib it ed th e de fen da nt fro m em pl oym en t or pa rti ci pa ti on in “ an y

vo lu nt eer act iv it y th at in vo lv es co nt ac t w it h ch il dr en un de r th e ag e of 18 ” wit ho ut

pr ob at io n of

fic e ap pr ov al

. Id

. at 69 2

. In Th omp so n , th e de fen da nt di d no t ha ve a

-7

-hi st or y of ab us in g m ino rs , bu t ha d be en co nv ic te d of po ss es si ng an d di st rib ut in g ch il d

po rn og rap hy. W e up he ld th e li m it at io n on th e de fen da nt ’s vo lu nt eer act iv it ie s as

“ reas on ab ly neces sa ry ” in li gh t o f th e p ur po se s s et for th in § 3 55 3( a). Id

.

In li gh t of Si mon s an d Th omp so n , we co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t

co m m it pl ai n erro r by im

po si ng th e res tri ct io ns on Hug o Tho m ps on

. Tha t Tho m

ps on

ha s no t de m on st rat ed a pr op en si ty to co m m it se x of fen se s in pu bl ic do es no t m ak e th e

co nd it io ns ob vi ou sl y im

pr op er. Th omp so n up he ld res tri ct io n s o n t he de fen da nt ’s

pu bl ic acce ss to m in or s ev en th ou gh th e de fen da nt ha d no hi st or y of ab us in g m in or s

at al l. Here, H u g o Tho m ps on ’s hi st or y of se xu al ab us e of m in or s m ad e it at le as t

reas on ab ly d eb at ab le th at th e co ur t co ul d im po se a co nd it io n de si gn ed to m in im iz e

th e ris k to m in or s in pu bl ic pl aces

. The co nd it io ns , m or eo ve r, do no t i mp o s e an

ab so lu te ba n on pr ox im it y to m in or s, bu t in st ead req ui re writ te n pe rm is si on fro m th e

pr ob at i o n o f

f i c e

. “ [R]equ iri ng pr io r ap pr ov al be fo re a co nv ic te d se x of fen de r ha s

co nt act wit h m in or s is a reas on ab le m ean s of en su rin g th at su ch co nt ac t r e mai ns

ap pr o p r i a t e.” Mic kel

so n , 43 3 F.3 d at 10 57

. The di st ric t co ur t’s im po si ti on of

Co nd it io ns 5, 6 , and 7 was no t p la in erro r.

D.

Spec ia l Con di tio n 8: The de fen da nt sh al l no t po ss es s ob sc en e m at eri al

as de em ed in ap pr op ria te by th e pr ob at io n of fic e an d/ or tre at m en t st aff,

or pa tro ni ze an y pl ace whe re su ch m at eri al or en te rta in m en t is av ai la bl e.

C o n d i ti on 8 pr oh ib it s Tho m ps on fro m po ss es si ng ob sc en e m at eri al or

pa tro ni zi ng an es ta bl is hm en t whe re su ch m at eri al is av ai la bl e. Tho m ps on arg ue s th at

Co nd it io n 8 is un rel at ed to hi s hi st or y an d cha ract eri st ic s and im pe rm is si bl y va gu e.

Tho m ps on ’s va gu en es s ch al le ng e la rg el y hi ng es on a di sc rep an cy be twee n th e

writ te n jud gm en t an d th e co ur t’s or al pr on ou nc em en t at Tho m ps on ’s rev oc at io n

h e a r in g. At th e he ari ng , th e co ur t sa id th at it wou ld pr oh ib it Tho m ps o n f r o m

-8

-po ss es si ng “ an y ob sc en e m at eri a l or m at eri al th at is de em ed in ap pr op ria te by th e

pr ob at io n of

fic e or by th e tre at m en t st aff of an y pr og ram in whi ch y ou are

pa rti ci pa ti ng

. ” The jud gm en t fo rb id s Tho m ps on to po ss es s “ ob sc en e m at eri al as

de em ed i n a p p r o pr ia te by th e pr ob at io n of fic e an d/ or tre at m en t st aff.” Tho m ps on

arg ue s t ha t t he se co nd ph ras e in th e o ral pro no un cem en t— “ m at eri al th at is de em ed

in ap pr op ria te ”—i s va gu e an d ov erb ro ad

, be cau se he can no t kn ow wha t th e pr ob at io n

of fic e or tre at m en t st aff m ig ht de em “ in ap pr op ria te ,” an d be cau se th o s e o ffi ci al s

m ig ht im po se a gr eat er de pr iv at io n of li be rty t h a n i s reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry if th ey

ve nt ur e far be y on d o bs cen e m at eri al

. Se e S imo ns , 61 4 F .3d at 4 83 -8 5.

The go ve rn m en t do es no t de fen d th e la ng ua ge ci te d by Tho m ps on an d arg ue s

th at th e di st ric t co ur t “ m is sp ok e” at th e he ari ng be fo re cl ari fy in g th e co nd it io n in th e

writ te n jud gm en t. W hi le an or al se nt en ce co nt ro ls o v e r a c o nf li ct in g writ te n jud gm en t, m ere im

pr eci se la ng ua ge at a he ari ng “ wil l no t ne ga te th e co ur t’s ob vi ou s

in te nt .” Uni te d S ta te s v. Bu ck , 66 1 F .3d 36 4, 3 74 (8t h C ir. 2 01 1)

.

The go ve rn m en t po in ts ou t t h a t th e writ te n jud gm en t tra ck s th e or al

pr on ou nc em en t on th e ot he r ni ne co n di ti on s of rel eas e, an d su gg es ts th at th e co ur t

m us t ha ve in te nd ed th e sa m e on Co nd it io n 8. The or al pr o n o u n c e ment

, ap pl ie d

li te ral ly, wou ld rai se ob vi ou s co nc ern s un de r § 35 83 (d ), th e Due Pro ces s Cl au se , an d

th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t. It th us se em s un li ke ly th at th e co ur t in te nd ed to de le ga te to th e

pr ob at io n of

fic e an d tre at m en t st aff au th or it y to ap pl y an im pr eci se “ ap pr op ria te ne ss ”

st an da rd to reg ul at e wha t Tho m ps on m ay po ss es s. The writ te n co nd it io n, by co nt ras t,

was m or e na rro wly ta rg et ed an d in ke ep in g wit h a sp eci al co nd it io n pr ev io us ly us ed

by t h e s a me d is tri ct co ur t. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Key

, 83 2 F.3 d 83 7, 83 9 (8 th Ci r.

20 16 ). Neit he r pa rty ad vo cat es fo r th e br oa de r res tri ct io n, an d we are co nt en t to in fer

th at t h e di st ric t co ur t m is sp ok e at th e he ari ng an d in te nd ed th e na rro wer writ te n

co nd it io n.

-9

-As to th at co nd it io n, whi ch fo rb id s Tho m ps on to po ss es s “ ob sc en e m at eri al as

de em ed in ap pr op ria te by th e pr ob at io n of f i c e a n d/ or tre at m en t st aff,” th is co ur t

up he ld a co m

pa rab le res tri ct io n in Key

. W e ci te d th e Su pr em e Co ur t’s vi ew th at th e

s c o p e of a pr oh ib it io n on m ai li ng ob sc en e m at eri al s “ can be as cert ai ne d wit h

su ffi ci en t eas e,” id

. at 84 0 (q uo ti ng Smi th v. Uni te d St at es , 43 1 U.S. 29 1, 30 9 (1 97 7) ),

an d ex pl ai ne d th at th e co ur t’s gr a n t o f di sc ret io n to th e pr ob at io n of fic e to de em

m at eri al s in ap pr op ria te was “ li m it ed by th e le ga l de fin it io n of ob sc e n i t y.” Id

. In

ot he r wor ds

, be fo re Tho m ps on “ can be sa nc ti on ed fo r vi ol at in g th is sp eci al co nd it io n

of re l e a se , a co ur t m

us t fin d th at he po ss es se d m at eri al th at is bo th ob sc en e an d

de em ed in ap pr op ria te by a pr ob at io n of fic er or tre at m en t st aff.” Id

. Co nd it io n 8, as

cl ari fie d i n t he writ te n ju dg m en t, i s n ot im pe rm is si bl y

va gu e.

The re al so was n o p la in erro r in th e co ur t’s det erm in at io n th at Co nd it io n 8 i s

reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry to pr ot ect th e pu bl ic an d de te r fu tu re cri m es

. A lt ho ug h

Tho m ps on do es no t ha ve a hi st or y of po ss es si ng ob sc en e m at eri al s, we ha ve up he ld

co nd it io ns th at res tri ct a de fen da nt ’s acce ss to su ch m at eri al s whe re th e de fen da nt ha s

“ a pa tt ern of in ap pr op ria te be ha vi or to ward s m in or s.” Uni te d St at es v. Sc hu lt z , 84 5

F.3 d 87 9, 88 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). In Sc hu lt z , we affi rm ed a sp eci al co nd it io n th at wen t

e ve n fu rth er th an ob sc en it y by pr oh ib it in g th e de fen da nt fro m po ss es s i n g

po rn og rap hi c m at eri al s or en te rin g an es ta bl is hm en t whe re po rn og rap hy co ul d be

vi ewed

. Id

. at 88 1- 83

. W he re th e de fen da nt ha d a p r i o r co nv ic ti on fo r se xu al

co nd u c t w i t h a m in or fem al e an d a hi st or y of vi ol at in g no -co nt act or de rs , t he co ur t

reas on ed th at “ th e ne ed to pr ot ect ch il dr en fro m fu tu re ex pl oi ta ti on jus ti fie s ba nn in g

a de fen d a n t f

r o m po ss es si ng an y po rn og rap hy.” Id

. at 88 2 (in te rn al qu ot at io n

om it te d) . The d is tri ct co ur t t hu s d id no t p la in ly err by im po si ng Co nd it io n 8

.

E.

Spec ia l Con di tio n 9: The de fen da nt sh al l no t pu r c ha se or m ai nt ai n a

po st of fic e b o x o r an y ot he r type of pr iv at e m ai l bo x or an y type of

-1 0-st or ag e lo ck er, un it or faci li ty wit ho ut writ te n ap pr ov al of th e pr ob at io n

of fic e.

Tho m ps on la st ch al le ng es Co nd it io n 9, whi ch pr oh ib it s hi m fro m pu rch as in g

or m ai nt ai ni ng a pr iv at e po st of fic e bo x or an y ot he r pr iv at e m ai lb ox or st or ag e un it

wit ho ut ap pr ov al of th e pr ob at io n of fic e. W e ha ve up he ld su ch res tri ct io ns in cas es

whe re of fen de rs ha ve po ss es se d or di st rib ut ed ch il d po rn og rap hy, or tra ns po rte d

ob sc en e m at te r, as a m eas ur e to pr ev en t su rrep ti ti ou s rece ip t of fo rb id de n m at eri al s.

Se e, e.g

. , Uni te d S t a t e s v. Muh le nb ru ch

, 68 2 F.3 d 10 96

, 11 05 -0 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 );

Uni te d St at es v. Jo Don

, 19 F. App ’x 44 3, 44 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ). Tho m ps on arg ue s th at

be cau se he do es no t ha ve co nv ic ti on s fo r ch il d po rn og rap hy or ob sc en it y of fen se s,

Co nd it io n 9 is no t reas on ab ly rel at ed to hi s hi st or y an d c h a ract eri st ic s an d is an

un reas on ab le res tra in t o n h is li be rty.

Th o mp s o n di d no t ob

ject to th is co nd it io n, so th e di st ric t co ur t was no t

p r om pt ed to ex pl ai n it s reas on in g. The pe rm is si bi li ty of th e co nd it io n un de r § 35 83 (d ) is reas on ab ly de ba ta bl e, bu t un de r a pl ai n erro r st an da rd

, Tho m ps on m us t

es ta bl is h th at th e co nd it io n is ob v i o u s l y i mperm is si bl e. Bec au se Tho m ps on ha s a

hi st or y of ab us in g m in o r s, th e di st ric t co ur t reas on ab ly co ul d ha ve be en co nc ern ed

th at he wou ld tu rn to rece ip t o f il li ci t m at eri al s th ro ug h th e m ai l as an ou tl et for hi s

de si res

. Th o mp so n al so ha s a pr io r co nv ic ti on fo r m ari juan a tra ffi ck in g, an d th e

di st ric t co ur t reas on ab ly co ul d ha ve be en wor rie d ab ou t Tho m ps on se cret ly sh ip pi ng ,

rece iv in g, or st or in g dr ug s or dr ug pr oc eed s th ro ug h th e us e of pr iv at e m ai lb ox es or

st or ag e lo ck ers

. The co nd it io n a ll ows Tho m ps on to se ek an d ob ta in ap pr ov al fo r a

pr iv at e m ai lb ox or st or ag e lo ck er if he ha s a le gi ti m at e ne ed to us e th os e faci li ti es an d

th ere are m ean s to en su re th at he wil l no t m is us e th em

. W e co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t

co ur t di d no t pl ai nl y err in de ci di ng th at Co n d i t i on 9 is reas on ab ly rel at ed to

pr ot ect in g th e pu bl ic an d de te rri ng Tho m ps on fro m co m

m it ti ng fu tu re of

fen se s, an d

reas on ab ly neces sa ry

to acco m pl is hi ng th os e en ds

.

* * *

-1 1-The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

.

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

-1 2-