T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he H on orabl e M ark W . B ennett , D i stri ctJudg e f or the N orthern ** D i s tr i c tof

I ow a , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on.

NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. E L VI R A C HA R L E Y, D e f e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 10112 D . C . N o. 3: 02- c r - 00081- E H C - 1- P HX ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona E a r l H . C a rr ol l , S e ni orD i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry 14, 2011 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B ef ore: S C H R O E D E R , T H O M A S , C i rc ui tJudg es , and B E N N E T T , D i stri ct Judg e. **

D ef endantE l vi raC harl eyappeal s herfi nal se nt ence of three concurrentl i fe t e rm s f orf i r s t - de gr e e m ur de ri n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . §§ 1111 a nd 1153( a ) a nd



# FI LED FEB 25 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

thr e e c ons e c ut i ve l i f

e t e rm s f orpos s e s s i on orus e of

a f i r e a rm i n c onne c t i on w i th a c r im e o f v io le n c e in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 9 2 4 ( c ) a n d ( j) . O n O c to b e r9 , 2 0 0 3 , s he ha d r e c e i ve d the s a m e s e nt e nc e pr ovi s i ona l l y , ow i ng t o m e nt a l di s e a s e or de f e c t , a nd w a s c om m i tt e d t o F e de r a l M e di c a l C e nt e rC a r s w e l l f orc a r e a nd tre atm ent , pu rs uantt o 1 8 U . S . C . § 4 24 4(d). O n January 29 , 20 09 , the W ar den at F M C C a r s w e l l c e r t i f

i e d tha tC ha r l e y ’ s c ondi t i on ha d s ubs t a nt i a l l y i m pr ove d a nd th a t s h e n o lo n g e rn e e d e d “c o n tin u e d c u s to d y f o rc a r e a n d tr e a tm e n t in a s u itab le f a c ility .” T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t im p o s e d f in a l s e n te n c e a c c o r d in g ly o n M a r c h 3 , 2 0 1 0 . C h a r le y is c u rr e n tly s e rv in g h e rf in a l s e n te n c e a t F M C C a r s w e ll. C harl eyappeal s herfi nal se nt ence on the fol l ow i ng grou nd s: (1) the di stri ct courterre d b y notho l di ng a f urther § 42 44 hear i ng and b y notcont i nu i ng her p ro v i si o n al sen t en ce; (2 ) th e d i stri ctco u rterred b y co n cl u d i n g th ati th ad t o i m p o se thr e e c ons e c ut i ve s e nt e nc e s on he rf orthe f i r e a rm s c ount s ; ( 3) the c ons e c ut i ve se nt enci ng prov i si on of se ct i on 92 4(c) di d n otappl y w hen she fa ce d g re at er m a nda t ory m i ni m um s e nt e nc e s f orhe rs e c ond a nd thi r d f i r e a rm s c ount s ; ( 4) the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by “ s t a c ki ng” the s e nt e nc e s on the f i r e a rm s c ount s ; ( 5) the d i s tr i c tc o u r te rr e d b y c o n s i d e r i n g th e ma n d a t o ry s e n t e n c e s o u t l i n e d i n 1 8 U . S. C. § 3559( f ) w he n tha ts t a tut e ha d notbe e n e na c t e d a tthe t i m e tha ts he c om m i tt e d the3

char ged o ff

ense s; and (6) the di stri ctcourtfa i l ed t o con si der ado w nw ar d d eparture b a s e d o n h e rd e c r e a s e d me n t a l c ap a c i ty . W e a f f i rm. 1. T he di stri ctcourtdi d n oterr by notcont i nu i ng C harl ey ’ s provi si on al s e n te n c e o rb y im p o s in g a f in a l s e n te n c e w ith o u t af u r th e r§ 4 2 4 4 h e a r in g to de t e rm i ne he rpr e s e ntm e nt a l c ondi t i on. T he r e w a s s i m pl y no a uthor i ty , unde rthe go verni ng st atut e, t o h ol d a heari ng or t o con t i nu e the prov i si on al se nt ence on ce the W a r de n a tF M C C a r s w e l l c e r t i f i e d tha tC ha r l e y no l onge rr e qui r e d c a r e or tr e a tm e nti n s uc h a f

a c i l i ty . S e c t i on 4244( e ) of T i t l e 18 of

the U ni t e d S t a t e s C ode pl ai nl y a nd un am bi gu ou sl y provi des that , w hen the di re ct or of the fa ci l i ty i n w hi ch a def endanti s hospi t al i ze d p ursuantt o § 42 44 (d) c ert i fi es thatthe defendanthas r e c ove r e d f

r om hi s orhe rm e nt a l di s e a s e orde f e c tt o s uc h a n e xt e nttha the ors he i s no l onge ri n ne e d of

c us t ody f

orc a r e ortr e a tm e nti n s uc h f a c i l i ty , a nd the prov i si on al se nt ence i m po se d p ursuantt o § 42 44 (d) has no texpi re d, “ the court s h a ll proceed fi nal l y t o sent enci ng and m aym od i fythe prov i si on al se nt ence . ” ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ) ; a c c o r d W e b e rv . U .S. D is t. C t. fo rC e n t. D is t. o f C a lif. , 9 F . 3d 7 6 , 7 9 (9 th C i r. 1 9 9 3 ) (h o l d i n g th ato n ce a w ard en i ssu es a certi fi cat e o f reco v ery, the c our tm us tpr oc e e d t o f i na l s e nt e nc i ng a nd l a c ks the a uthor i ty t o hol d a heae ri ng as t o w hether the prov i si on al se nt ence shou l d b e c on t i nu ed).4

2. C h a r le y ’s s e c o n d , th ir d , a n d f o u r th c la im s o f

e rr o ra r e u n te n ab le in l i g h to f th e p l a i n l a n g u a g e o f

§ 9 2 4 ( c ) a n d (

j ) , o u rp r e c e d e n t , a n d th e Su p r e me C our t ’ s de c i s i on i n A bb ot t v. U ni ted Stat es , 1 3 1 S . C t . 1 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) , h a n d e d d o wn a f te rth is ap p e a l w a s b r ie f e d . S e c tio n 9 2 4 (

j) ( 1 ) p r o v id e s f

o rp u n is h m e n t o f

d e a th , a t e rm of y e a r s , orl i f

e f orm ur de r( a s de f

i ne d i n 18 U . S . C . § 1111) “ i n the c our s e of a vi ol a t i on of

s ubs e c t i on ( c ) . ” T hus , a l i f e s e nt e nc e w a s pe rm i s s i bl e on e a c h of C h a r le y ’s th r e e c o n v ic tio n s f o rm u r d e rin th e c o u r s e o f a § 9 2 4 ( c ) v io la tio n . S e c t i on 924( c ) ( 1) ( D ) ( i i ) pr ovi de s tha t , “ [ n] otw i ths t a ndi ng a ny othe rpr ovi s i on of l a w . . . no t e rm of

i m pr i s onm e nti m pos e d on a pe r s on unde r[ § 924( c ) ] s ha l l run concurrent l y w i th any other t erm of i m pri sonm enti m po se d o n thatpers on . . . . ” I n U ni te d State s v . B e l tr an-Mor e no , 55 6 F . 3d 91 3, 91 5 (9th C i r. 20 09 ), w e hel d that § 924( c ) ( 1) ( D ) ( i i ) m e a ns tha t“ e a c h i nde pe nde nt§ 924( c ) c ounti n the i ndi c tm e nt i m po se s a consec ut i ve se nt ence i n add i t i on t o any other s ent ence i m po se d, ei ther un der § 92 4(c) or un der a ny other c ou nt s f or w hi ch the defendanthas bee n c onvi c t e d. ” ( e m pha s i s i n the or i gi na l ) . I n A b b o tt , th e S u p re m e C o u rt h eld th at “a defe nd anti s s ubj ec tt o a m andat ory, consec ut i ve se nt ence for a§ 9 24 (c ) conv i ct i on , and i s notspar ed fr om thatse nt ence by vi rtue of re ce i vi ng a hi gh er m an d at o ry m i n i m u m o n a d i fferen tco u n to f co n v i ct i o n . ” 1 3 1 S . C t . at2 3 . T h u s, C h a r le y ’s lif

e s e n te n c e s o n h e rth r e e § 9 2 4 ( c ) c o n v ic tio n s h a d to b e c o n s e c u tiv e to5

e a c h othe ra nd t o he rs e nt e nc e on he r§ 1111 c onvi c t i ons . T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d not i m p ro p erl y “ st ack ” th e l i fe sen t en ces fo r C h arl ey’ s th ree § 9 2 4 (c) co n v i ct i o n s, be c a us e C ha r l e y w a s notc onvi c t e d of vi ol a t i ng § 924( c ) onc e i n thr e e di f f e r e nt w a y s , b u t o f

v io la tin g § 9 2 4 ( c ) th r e e tim e s . Se e i d. ( e x p la in in g th a t th e “e x c e p t” c l a us e of § 924( c ) m e a ns tha tthe de f e nda nti s s ubj e c tt o one m a nda t ory m i ni m um i f he pos s e s s e d, br a ndi s he d, a nd di s c ha r ge d a gun, nott o “ s t a c ke d” s e nt e nc e s f or th a t v io la tio n o f

§ 9 2 4 ( c ) ) ; s e e a ls o id . a t30. 3. C ha r l e y a l s o c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by c ons i de r i ng 18 U . S . C . § 3559( f

) be c a us e tha ts t a tut e w a s note na c t e d a tthe t i m e tha ts he com m i tt ed the charged offe nses . S ec t i on 35 59 (f ), w hi ch prov i des f

or m andat ory m i ni m um t e rm s of

i m pr i s onm e ntf

orvi ol e ntc r i m e s a ga i ns tc hi l dr e n, i nc l udi ng m ur de r , w a s note f

f e c t i ve unt i l J ul y 27, 2006, w e l l a f t e rC ha r l e y c om m i tt e d the char ged o ff

ense s. E ven i f i tw as error f or the di stri ctcourtt o con si der that prov i si on atC harl ey ’ s s ent enci ng , ho w ever , the error c ou l d n othave had any eff ec t o n C h a r le y ’s s e n te n c e , b e c a u s e w e h a d a lr e a d y h e ld th a t ac o n v ic tio n f o rf ir s tde gr e e m ur de ri n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . § 1111 m a nda t e s a m i ni m um s e nt e nc e of lif e im p r is o n m e n t w ith o u t p o s s ib ility o f r e le a s e . U

ni te d State s v . L aFl e ur , 971 F . 2d 20 0, 20 9 (9th C i r. 19 91 ).6

4 . F in a lly , C h a r le y c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d b y f a ilin g to c o n s id e ra d o w n w a r d d e p a r tu r e b a s e d o n h e rd e c r e a s e d m e n ta l c ap a c ity . T h is co n t en t i o n i s al so d efeat ed b y L aFl e ur . 97 1 F . 2d at20 8 (“ [A ] defe nd antconv i ct ed o f f ir s t d e g r e e m u r d e ru n d e r§ 1 1 1 1 ( a ) m u s t b e s e n te n c e d to lif e in p r is o n .” ) ; se e al so U ni ted Stat es v. Mi

gu el , 338 F . 3d 995, 1006 ( 9th C i r . 2003) ( r e l y i ng on L aFl e uri n rej ec t i ng cont ent i on thata di stri ctcourtshou l d b e a l l ow ed t o d epart d o w n w ar d to a les s th an li fe se n ten ce o n a § 1 1 1 1 co n v icti o n ). A lso , C h ar ley’s r e l i a nc e on U . S . S . G . § 5K 2. 13 a s a uthor i ty f ora dow nw a r d de pa r tur e f or di m i ni shed capaci ty i s m i spl ac ed. C harl eyw as subj ec tt o a st atut ory m andat ory m i ni m um . U nd erU . S . S . G . § 5 G 1. 1(b), thatm andat ory m i ni m um se nt ence p r e c lu d e d d e p a r tu r e b e lo w th e s ta tu to r ily r e q u ir e d s e n te n c e . L aFl e ur , 97 1 F . 2d at 2 0 8 ; Un i te d

S ta te s v . Wi l l i a ms , 93 9 F . 2d 72 1, 72 6 (9th C i r. 19 91 ). AF F I R ME D.