2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-13-2009 

# U SA v . Purnel l P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-3257

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . P ur ne ll " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 2050. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/2050NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

_________ N o. 07- 3257

_________ U N IT E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A .,

A ppel l ee, v. C H A N C E P U R N E L L .

A p p e lla n t.

___________________ A p p e a l f ro m th e U n ited S tate s D istric t C o u rt fort he East ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a C ase N o . 0 2 -C R -00 0 2 5 -2 (H o n o rab le Jam es T . G il es)

__________________ S u b m itted P u rsua n t t o T h ir d C ir cu itL A R 3 4 . 1 (a)

on D ece m ber8, 2008 Be f o r e : M c KE E , S M I T H, a n d RO T H C i r cui tJudges

(F il ed : Jan u ary1 3 , 2 0 0 9 )2 OP I NI ON OF THE COURT M cK E E , C i r cui tJ udge C hance Pur nel l appea l s t he 20 mont h s ent ence of i m pr i s onm enti m pos ed byt he di s t r i ctcour taft erPur nel l vi ol at ed the t erm s of hi s s upervi s ed r el eas e. Fort he r eas ons th a t f o llo w , w e w ill a f

f ir m . B eca us e w e w r i t e pr i m ar i l yfort he part i es , i ti s notnece s s aryt o r eci t e the fa ct s or hi s t or yof thi s cas e exc epti ns ofaras m aybe hel pful t o ourbr i ef di s cus s i on. T he gui del i ne r ange f

ort he tw o G r ade C vi ol at i ons Pur nel l admi t t ed w as 8- 14 m ont hs . T he m axi m um s t atut or ypenal t yw as t w o y ear s . O n appea l , Pur nel l ar gues t hatt he di s t r i ct c o u r t ’ s s e n t e n c e o f

2 0 m o n t h s i n c a r c e r a t i o n w a s u n r e a s o n a b l e b e c a u s e i tw a s w h o l l y p u n iti v e , d isre g a rd e d h is n e e d f o r tre a tm e n t, an d ig n o re d th e se n ten c in g f a c to rs s e t f

o rth in S e c tio n 3 5 5 3 (a ). W e d is a g re e . I n G al lv. U

ni t ed Stat es , 1 2 8 S .C t. 5 8 , Id at597. T he Supr eme C our tcl ar i fi ed that w e m u st fir st en su re tha t th e d istri ct co u rt“c o m m itted n o sign ifi ca n t pro ce d u ral error, s uch as . . . fai l i ng t o cons i dert he 3553( a) fac t or s . . . ” I d. Ab s e n ta n yp r o c e d u r a l e r r o r , we m us t“cons i dert he s ubs t ant i ve r eas onabl enes s of the s ent ence i m pos ed undert he abus eo f -d is c re tio n s ta n d a rd ,” ta k in g in to a c c o u n t th e to ta lity o f th e c ir c u m s ta n c e s . I

d. T he di s t r i ctcour ti s r equi r ed t o cons i dereac h of the § 3553( a) fac t or s and “s et f o rth e n o u g h to sa tisf

yth e a p p e llate c o u rt th a t h e h a s c o n sid e re d th e p a rties ’ a rg u m e n ts3

and has a r eas oned bas i s forexer ci s i ng hi s ow n l egal deci s i on m aki ng author i t y . ” U ni t ed St at es v. Les s ner , 498 F. 3d 185, 203 ( 3d C i r . 2007) ( quot i ng R i t a v. U ni t ed Stat es , 12 7 S. C t. 2 4 5 6 , 2 4 6 8 (2 0 0 7 )) . T he r ecor d s how s t hatt he di s t r i ctcour tcons i der ed Pur nel l ’ s cr i m i nal hi s t or yand th e s e ri o u s n e s s o f

th e u n d e rl y in g v io la tio n . S e e . A pp. 29- 30. D es pi t e Pur nel l ’ s ar gum ent t o t h e c o n t r a r y, t h e c o u r ta l s o c o n s i d e r e d h i s n e e d f o rd ru g t r e a t m e n t . U n d e r s t a n d a b l y, t he courtdi s count ed the val ue of tr eatm entnot i ng t hatPur nel l had frus t r at ed ea r l i er “trus t i ng and gene r ous ” ef for t s atr ehabi l i t at i on w i th “ca l cul at ed dec ept i on. ” I d. a t 3 0 . P u rne ll also arg u es th at th e tri al co u rtd id n o t r ea so n ab lyap p lythe 3 5 5 3 (a) fa ctors b e c a u s e th e s e n te n c e e x c e e d s th e a d v is o ry G u id e lin e ra n g e . T h a t a rg u m e n t is f ri v o lo u s . G iv e n P u rn e ll’s re p e a ted in f ra c tio n s, a n d h is re p e a ted a ttem p ts to d e c e iv e h is pr obat i on offi cer s , drug couns el or s and the court , as w el l as t he numberof t i m es he fa i l ed s upervi s ed r el eas e, t he courtact ed qui t e r eas onabl yi n i m pos i ng a s ent ence t hatexce eded th e re c o m m e n d e d ra n g e . I I . Foral l of the above r eas ons , w e w i l l aff i r m t he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s s ent ence .