FI L ED

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S

EL EVENTH CI RCUI T

APRI L 28, 2009

THOMAS K. KAH

N

CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

N o

. 0 8

- 1 5 4 1 6

N o n

- A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 7

- 0 0 0 0 5

- C R

- J T C

- 3

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A

,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e

,

v e r s u s

H A R O L D A

. S P A C E

,

D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t

f o r t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f G e o r g i a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

( A p r i l 2 8

, 2 0 0 9 )

B e f o r e B I R C H

, H U L L a n d W I L S O N

, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

P E R C U R I A M :

H a r o l d S p a c e a p p e a l s t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s r e f u s a l t o r e d a c t a f

a c t u a l s t a t e m e n tf

r o m h i s p r e

- s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e p o r t ( “ P S I ” )

. O n a p p e a l

, S p a c e a r g u e s t h a t

t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t p r o p e r l y a d d r e s s h i s a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e f a c t u a l s t a t e m e n t i n

p a r a g r a p h 4 0 o f h i s P S I w a s u n s u b s t a n t i a t e d a n d u n d u l y p r e j u d i c i a l

, i n v i o l a t i o n o f

F e d e r a l R u l e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) a s w e l l a s h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l d u e

p r o c e s s r i g h t s

. S p a c e a l s o a s s e r t s t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s f a i l u r e t o a d d r e s s h i s 1

a r g u m e n t i s e x t r e m e l y p r e j u d i c i a l b e c a u s e i t w i l l a f f e c t d e c i s i o n s t h a t t h e B u r e a u o f

P r i s o n s ( “ B O P ” ) m a k e s a b o u t h i m a n d c o u l d e v e n r e s u l t i n h i s c i v i l c o n f i n e m e n t t o

a n i n d e f i n i t e t e r m a s a s e x u a l l y d a n g e r o u s c r i m i n a l

.

“ W e r e v i e w d e n o v o l e g a l q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e F e d e r a l R u l e s o f

C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e

. ” U n i t e d S t a t e s v

. S

p e a r s

, 4 4 3 F

. 3 d 1 3 5 8

, 1 3 6 1 ( 1 1 t h C i r

.

2 0 0 6 ) ( p e r c u r i a m )

. F e d e r a l R u l e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) r e q u i r e s a d i s t r i c t

c o u r t a t s e n t e n c i n g t o m a k e a d e t e r m i n a t i o n a s t o a d i s p u t e d f a c t i n a P S I

,

p r o v i d i n g t h a t i t “ m u s t

- - f o r a n y d i s p u t e d p o r t i o n o f t h e p r e s e n t e n c e r e p o r t o r o t h e r

c o n t r o v e r t e d m a t t e r

- - r u l e o n t h e d i s p u t e o r d e t e r m i n e t h a t a r u l i n g i s u n n e c e s s a r y

e i t h e r b e c a u s e t h e m a t t e r w i l l n o t a f f e c t s e n t e n c i n g

, o r b e c a u s e t h e c o u r t w i l l n o t

c o n s i d e r t h e m a t t e r i n s e n t e n c i n g

. . . . ” F e d

. R

. C r i m

. P

. 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) ( B ) ; s e e a l s o

U n i t e d S t a t e s v

. L o

p e z

, 9 0 7 F

. 2 d 1 0 9 6

, 1 1 0 1 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 1 9 9 0 ) ( i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e

p r e d e c e s s o r t o R u l e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) a n d p r o v i d i n g t h a t “ w h e n a d e f e n d a n t c h a l l e n g e s a

Parag raph 40 of

the PSI rec ounted a br ief e ncounter betwee n Space a

nd 13-y ear -old 1

male that occ urre d in 2001 on a stree t in Bing hampton, New Y ork. Ther e we re no c harg es filed.

2f

a c t u a l a s s e r t i o n i n a P S I

, t h e c o u r t m u s t e i t h e r m a k e a f i n d i n g a s t o t h e a l l e g a t i o n

o r d e t e r m i n e t h a t n o s u c h f i n d i n g i s n e c e s s a r y b e c a u s e t h e m a t t e r c o n t r o v e r t e d w i l l

n o t b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t i n s e n t e n c i n g ” )

. F o r a n y f i n d i n g t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

m a k e s u n d e r R u l e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) ( B )

, t h e s e n t e n c i n g c o u r t “ m u s t a p p e n d a c o p y o f t h e

c o u r t ’ s d e t e r m i n a t i o n s u n d e r t h i s r u l e t o a n y c o p y o f t h e p r e s e n t e n c e r e p o r t m a d e

a v a i l a b l e t o t h e B u r e a u o f P r i s o n s

. ” F e d

. R

. C r i m

. P

. 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) ( C ) ; s e e a l s o L o p e z

,

9 0 7 F

. 2 d a t 1 1 0 1 ( “ I n e i t h e r c a s e

, a ‘ w r i t t e n r e c o r d o f s u c h f i n d i n g s a n d

d e t e r m i n a t i o n s s h a l l b e a p p e n d e d t o a n d a c c o m p a n y a n y c o p y o f t h e p r e s e n t e n c e

i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e p o r t t h e r e a f t e r m a d e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e B u r e a u o f P r i s o n s o r t h e P a r o l e

C o m m i s s i o n

. ’ ” ) ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d )

. T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t m u s t s t r i c t l y a d h e r e t o t h e

d i c t a t e s o f R u l e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) “ b e c a u s e t h e r u l e h e l p s e n s u r e t h a t f u t u r e d e c i s i o n s a b o u t

a d e f e n d a n t ’ s p e n a l t r e a t m e n t a r e b a s e d o n a f a i r a n d a c c u r a t e P S I

. ” L o p e z

, 9 0 7

F

. 2 d a t 1 1 0 1

.

H e r e

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f a i l e d t o c o m p l y w i t h R u l e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 )

. F i r s t

, w h i l e i t

d e n i e d S p a c e ’ s r e q u e s t t o r e m o v e p a r a g r a p h 4 0 f r o m t h e P S I

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

f a i l e d “ t o m a k e a f

i n d i n g a s t o t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e c h a l l e n g e d f a c t u a l p r o p o s i t i o n o r

t o d e t e r m i n e t h a t n o r e l i a n c e w i l l b e p l a c e d o n t h a t p r o p o s i t i o n a t t h e t i m e o f

s e n t e n c i n g

. ” F E D

. R

. C R I M

. P

. a d v i s o r y c o m m i t t e e ’ s n o t e ( 1 9 8 3 A m e n d m e n t s )

.

S e c o n d

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f a i l e d t o a p p e n d a c o p y o f i t s d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o t h e P S I

, i n

3v i o l a t i o n o f i t s o b l i g a t i o n u n d e r R u l e 3 2 ( i ) ( 3 ) ( C )

.

W e n o t e

, h o w e v e r

, t h a t b e c a u s e t h e d i s p u t e d f a c t u a l s t a t e m e n t h a d n o

h a r m f u l e f f e c t o n S p a c e ’ s s e n t e n c e

, t h e r e i s n o n e e d t o v a c a t e h i s s e n t e n c e

. 2

A c c o r d i n g l y

, w e r e m a n d t h i s c a s e b a c k t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e

p e r t i n e n t p r o c e d u r e s

. 3

R E M A N D E D

.

At sentenc ing be fore the district court, Spac e did not re- raise his objec tion to parag raph 2

40 until after the district court imposed sente nce. Mor eover , on appea l, Space doe s not even

reque st resente ncing

. See Br . of Appe llant at 15 (re questing “this Court to remand this case to

the district court with direc tion to redac t the content of pa rag raph 40 of

the pre -sentenc e re port

or addr ess the [sic] Mr. Space ’s objections to that para g raph in a ccor dance with the dictates of

Rule 32 and due pr ocess” ).

I n a similar ca se whe re the district court “f ailed to make a

finding as to [the 3

defe ndant’s] factua l challeng e to the PSI or to make a n express determination that no finding

was ne cessa

ry ,” we g ave the following instructions on remand:

The district court must append to [t he d efe ndant’s] PSI either its

fact u al finding as to the disputed fac tual matter or its express

deter mination that no finding is nec essar y beca use i t did not rely

on

the matter in sentenc ing. I f the district co u rt makes an express

deter mination that it did not rely on the disputed fac tual m at ter in

sentenc ing, then due p ro ce ss is not implicated and rese ntencing is

unnece ssary

. Of course

, rese ntencing will be nece ssary if the district

court determines t hat any of t he information upon which it relied in

sentenc ing w as mater ially inacc urate

.

See Shuk wit v. United States , 973 F.2d 903, 905 ( 11th Cir. 1992) (per curia m) (footnote omitted).

4