FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT JUNE 8, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 12889 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 2 0 5 2 9 - C R - J AG U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s J E F F R E Y T O B I N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( Ju n e 8, 2007) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B L A C K an d B A R K E T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:In h is reply brie f, Tobin

alsoargue s th edis tric t c ourt fail ed to autho r a

n 1 8 U .S. C. 1 § 3 55 3( c )( 1) state ment o f re a so ns . H ow e ver, Tobin a ba ndon e d this iss ue by failingto raiseit in h is initial brief. See United States v. Thomas , 242 F.3d 1028, 1033 ( 11th Cir. 2001). 2 J e f f r e y T o b in ap p e a ls h is c o n v ic tio n a n d s e n te n c e f o rp o s s e s s io n o f

c h ild pornogr aphy , i n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . § 2252A ( a ) ( 5) ( B ) . T obi n a s s e r t s hi s due pr oc e s s r i ght s w e r e vi ol a t e d by the f our - y e a rde l a y be tw e e n the e xe c ut i on of the s e a r c h w a rr a nta nd hi s i ndi c tm e nt . T obi n a l s o c ont e nds the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by e x c lu d in g th e te s tim o n y o f G r e g o r io D ia z , to w h o m J o r g e G a r c iah a d p u rp o r te d ly spok en abou ti m ages of chi l d p orno graphy. T ob i n al so as se rt s the di stri ctcourt e rr e d i n i m pos i ng hi s s e nt e nc e be c a us e : ( 1) the di s tr i c tc our tappl i e d the G u id e lin e s in a m a n d a to ry f a s h io n ; a n d ( 2 ) th e s e n te n c e im p o s e d w a s p r o c e d u r a lly unr e a s ona bl e be c a us e the di s tr i c tc our tga ve undue w e i ghtt o the G ui de l i ne s r a nge w ith o u t co n sid er in g th e o th er1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 (a ) f ac to rs . W e a ff

irm T o b in ’s 1 conv i ct i on and sent ence . I . DI S C US S I ON A . P r e - i ndi c tm e nt

de lay A d is tr ic t c o u r t’s r e f

u s a l to d is m is s a n in d ic tm e n t is n o r m a lly s u b je c t to r e v ie w f o ra n a b u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . U

ni t e d Stat e s v . Fox m an , 87 F . 3d 1220, 1222 (11t h C i r. 19 96 ). H ow ever , w here , as here , a def endantfa i l s t o o bj ec tt o an in d ic tm e n t in th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, w e r e v ie w o n ly f o rp la in e rr o r . U

ni t ed Stat es v.3

V a lle jo , 297 F . 3d 1154, 1164 ( 11th C i r . 2002) . “ U nde rthi s s t a nda r d, the r e m us tbe an error thati s pl ai n and thataf fe ct s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s. W hen t hese three fa ct ors a r e m e t , the c our t s of

appe a l m a y the n e xe r c i s e the i rdi s c r e t i on a nd c or r e c tthe e rr or i f i tse ri ou sl y a ff

ec t s the fa i rnes s, i nt egri ty, or pu bl i c r eput at i on of j ud i ci al proceedi ng s. ” I

d. a t1165.

“ T h e l i m i to n p re-i n d i ctm en td el ay i s u su al l y setb y th e st atu t e o f l i m i t at i o n s. B u t, th e D u e P r o c e s s C la u s e c a n b a ra n in d ic tm e n t e v e n w h e n th e in d ic tm e n t is brou gh tw i thi n the l i m i t at i on peri od . ” Fox m an , 8 7 F .3 d a t 1 2 2 2 . F o rd is m is s a l to be prop er , a def

endantm ustshow “ thatpre- i nd i ctm entdel ay caused hi m ac tual s ubs t a nt i a l pr e

j udi c e a nd tha tthe de l a y w a s the pr oduc tof a de l i be r a t e a c tby the go vernm entdesi gn ed t o g ai n a t ac t i ca l advant age. ” Id . T h e d i stri ctco u rtd i d n o tp l ai n l y err b y n o td i sm i ssi n g th e i n d i ctm en tag ai n st T ob i n. A s T ob i n ackno w l edges, the del ay i n the i nd i ctm entagai nsthi m w as oc c a s i one d by a r e di r e c t i on of F B I r e s our c e s a s a r e s ul tof the t e rr or i s ta tt a c ks of S e p te m b e r1 1 , 2 0 0 1 . T h is w a s n o t “a d e lib e r a te a c t b y th e g o v e rn m e n t d e s ig n e d to ga i n a t a c t i c a l a dva nt a ge , ” a nd, the r e f or e , T obi n w oul d notha ve be e n e nt i t l e d t o a di sm i ss al of hi s i nd i ctm enteven i f he c ou l d sho w “ subst ant i al ac tual prej ud i ce . ” Se e i d.To thee xtent T ob in m ake s mo retha n a pa ssingre ferenc eto a

c ompuls or

y proc e ss 2 violation, see Ac cess Now, Inc. v. S o u th w es t A i rlines Co. , 385 F.3d 1324, 1330 ( 11th Cir. 2004) (holdingan issue is aba ndon ed on appe al where no argument is presente d), therewas no constitutional viol ation beca use a de fenda

nt does not have theright to comp el th e introduction of inadmissible hearsa

y , see U nited States v. De aton , 468 F.2d 541, 544 ( 5th Cir. 1972).

4 B . H e ars ay W e r evi ew the di stri ctcourt ’ s rul i ng on the adm i ss i bi l i ty of hea rs ay te s tim o n y f

o ra n a b u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . U

ni t ed Stat es v. W

alke r , 59 F . 3d 1196, 1198 (11t h C i r. 19 95 ). A st at em entthatw ou l d o therw i se be i nadm i ss i bl e a s hea rs ay m ay b e ad m i tt ed i n t o ev i d en ce i f th e d ecl aran ti s u n av ai l ab l e an d th e st at em en t“ so f a rte n d e d to s u b

je c t th e d e c la r a n t to . . . c r im in a l liab ility . . . th a t a r e a s o n a b le p erso n i n th e d ecl aran t ’ s p o si t i o n w o u l d n o th av e m ad e th e st at em en tu n l ess be l i e vi ng i tt o be true . ” F e d. R . E vi d. 804( b) ( 3) . H ow e ve r , i f a c r i m i na l de f

e nda nt s e e k s to o f

f e rs u c h as ta te m e n t in o r d e rto e x c u lp a te h im s e lf , th e n th e s ta te m e n t is s t i l l i na dm i s s i bl e he a r s a y “ unl e s s c orr obor a t i ng c i r c um s t a nc e s c l e a r l y i ndi c a t e the trustw orthi ness of the st at em ent . ” Id . T he part i es agre e the decl ar ant , G ar ci a, w as u n a v a ilab le b e c a u s e h e w a s d e c e a s e d a t th e tim e o f tr ia l. T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in f in d in g G a r c ia ’s s ta te m e n ts to b e in a d m is s ib le h e a r s a y . I n G a r c ia ’s p u rp o r te d s ta te m e n t, h e a d m itte d o n ly to 2 onc e c l i c ki ng on s om e pi c tur e s i n a c ha tr oom by m i s t a ke . G a r c i a di d notm e nt i on w ha tki nd of

pi c tur e s the y w e r e . F ur the r , G a r c i a ha d no f e a rtha tD i a z , the pe r s on5

to w h o m h e m a d e th e s ta te m e n ts a n d h is b e s t f r ie n d s in c e 1 9 8 8 , w o u ld tu rn h im in . T h e r e f o r e , G a r c ia ’s s ta te m e n t w a s n o t a g a in s t h is p e n a l in te r e s t. See U ni t ed Stat es v . Funt , 8 9 6 F . 2 d 1 2 8 8 , 1 2 9 8 (1 1 th C i r. 1 9 9 0 ) (h o l d i n g th e ag ai n st -p en al -i n t erest r e qui r e m e ntw a s notm e tw he r e the de c l a r a ntdi d note xpe c tthe s t a t e m e ntt o be used agai nsthi m , even w here the st at em entw as “ som ew hatfa ci al l y i ncul pat ory” ) ; U ni t e d Stat e s v . M

ar t i no , 648 F . 2d 367, 391 ( 11th C i r . 1981) ( s t a t i ng “ the s t a t e m e nta ga i ns ti nt e r e s tm us tbe a l m os ta di r e c t , outr i ghts t a t e m e nttha tthe p e r s o n w a s le g a lly a t f

a u lt” ) . I n a ddi t i on, the r e w e r e no c orr obor a t i ng c i r c um s t a nc e s c l e a r l y i ndi c a t i ng the trustw orthi ness of G ar ci a’ s purpo rt ed st at em ent . T ob i n argues the fa ctG ar ci a had ac ce ss t o the com pu t eri s acorr ob orat i ng ci rc um st ance , bu tevi dence pres ent ed at tr i a l s how e d i m a ge s of

c hi l d por nogr aphy w e r e s a ve d t o the c om put e r ’ s ha r d dr i ve a tt i m e s w he n G a r c i a c oul d notpos s i bl y ha ve be e n us i ng the c om put e r . T he c ir c u m s ta n c e s , th e r e f

o r e , u n d e r m in e G a r c ia ’s s ta te m e n t, r a th e rth a n c le a r ly in d ic a tin g its tru s tw o r th in e s s . See U ni t e d Stat e s v . J

e r ni gan , 341 F . 3d 1273, 1288 ( 11th C i r . 2003) ( c onc l udi ng the trus tw or thi ne s s pr ong of R ul e 804( b) ( 3) ad m issib il ity w as n o t m et w h er e th e s tatem en t co n trad icted th e g o v er n m en t’ s evi dence of gui l t ).6

C . M an da tory app l i cat i on of the G ui del i nes A d i stri ctco u rtco m m i t s st atu t o ry B oo ke re rr o rwh e r e i tap p l i e s th e n o wa d v is o ry G u id e lin e s s y s te m a s m a n d a to ry . U ni t e d Stat e s v . She l ton , 400 F . 3d 1 3 2 5 , 1 3 3 0 -3 1 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ). T o b i n d i d n o tp reserv e h i s st atu t o ry B oo ke r a r g u m e n t b e lo w a n d , th e r e f o r e , w e r e v ie w th a t a r g u m e n t o n ly f o rp la in e rr o r . See U ni t ed Stat es v. R odri

gu ez , 3 9 8 F .3 d 1 2 9 1 , 1 2 9 8 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , ce rt. deni ed , 1 2 5 S. C t. 2 9 3 5 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otappl y the G ui del i nes a s m andat ory a nd , there fore , d i d n o tco m m i tst atu t o ry B oo ke rerror. T he di stri ctcourtst at ed i thad con si dere d T ob i n’ s a rgum ent s–w hi ch di sc usse d con si dera t i on of the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors und er B oo ke r , a nd the pr e s e nt e nc e i nve s t i ga t i on r e por t–w hi c h r e pe a t e dl y r e f e r e nc e d the a d v is o ry n a tu r e o f

th e G u id e lin e s in g e n e r a l a n d th e p o s s ib ility o f a p o s t- B oo ke r vari ance for T ob i n’ s m edi ca l cond i t i on . T he di stri ctcourt ’ s s t at em entthat “r e s p e c t” f

o rth e G u id e lin e s “u n d e rth e f a c ts a n d c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f th is c a s e ” d id n o t p e r m it a s e n te n c e b e lo w th e G u id e lin e s r a n g e m e r e ly r e f le c ts th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, as re qu i re d, w ei gh ed the G ui del i nes r ange, T ob i n’ s hi st ory a nd char ac t er i st i cs ( in c lu d in g h is m e d ic a l c o n d itio n ) , a n d th e o th e r§ 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s , a n d u ltim a te ly c onc l ude d tha t , unde rthe pa r t i c ul a rf a c t s of T obi n’ s c a s e , the c ons i de r a t i ons e m b o d ie d in th e G u id e lin e s r a n g e o u tw e ig h e d th e a r g u m e n ts T o b in a d v a n c e d a s to7

th e o th e r§ 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s . See U

ni t e d Stat e s v . H

unt , 4 5 9 F .3 d 1 1 8 0 , 1 1 8 6 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2006) ( hol di ng a l though “ the di s tr i c tc our tm a de s om e s t a t e m e nt s tha tc oul d be in te rp r e te d a s p r e s u m p tio n s in f a v o ro f th e G u id e lin e s . . . [ t]h e c o u r t’s d e c is io n to de f e rt o the G ui de l i ne s w a s ul t i m a t e l y a c a s e - s pe c i f i c one a nd w a s ba s e d on consi dera t i on of the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. ”) . D . R ea so n a b l en ess Af t e rth e d i s tr i c tc o u r th a s c o rr e c t l y c a l c u l a t e d th e Gu i d e l i n e s r a n g e , we r e v ie w th e f

in a l s e n te n c e f

o rr e a s o n a b le n e s s . Un i t e d S ta t e s v . Wi l l i a ms , 456 F . 3d 1 3 5 3 , 1 3 6 0 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , pet i t i on f or ce rt. f i l ed , N o . 0 6 - 7 3 5 2 ( O c to b e r1 9 , 2 0 0 6 ) . A s e n te n c e c a n b e r e v ie w e d f o rp r o c e d u r a l o rs u b s ta n tiv e r e a s o n a b le n e s s . H unt , 459 F . 3d at11 82 n. 3 (11 th C i r. 20 06 ). A se nt ence m ay be procedural l y unrea sonabl e, r e ga r dl e s s of

the a c tua l s e nt e nc e , i f

i ti s the r e s ul tof

a n i m pr ope rs e nt e nc i ng procedure, such as w hen t he di stri ctcourtfa i l s t o con si der r el evantfa ct ors und er 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) o rc o n s id e r s a n im p e r m is s ib le f a c to r . I d. “ W he n r e vi e w i ng a s e nt e nc e f

orr e a s ona bl e ne s s , w e m us te va l ua t e w he the rthe s e nt e nc e a c hi e ve s the pu rposes of se nt enci ng as st at ed i n 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) . ” Wi l l i a ms , 45 6 F . 3d at 1 3 6 0 . T o b in ’s s e n te n c e w a s p r o c e d u r a lly r e a s o n a b le . T h e r e c o r d r e f le c ts th a t, in addi t i on t o argum ent s r el at i ng t o the G ui del i nes r ange, the di stri ctcourthear d8

ar gu m ent s ( 1) abou tthe l engt h o f T ob i n’ s s ent ence i n com pari son t o st at e s ex offe nd er s, (2) thatT ob i n h ad never s ou gh tou tchi l dren, (3) thatT ob i n h ad ce as ed i nv ol vem entw i th chi l d p orno graphy aft er20 01 , (4) thatT ob i n h ad been di agno se d w i th tw o di f

f e r e ntty pe s of

c a nc e r , ( 5) a boutthe pr oba bi l i ty of T obi n e nda nge r i ng c hi l dr e n i n the f

utur e , ( 6) tha ta s e nt e nc e of hous e a rr e s tw a s a va i l a bl e , ( 7) a bout w hether T ob i n h ad previ ou sl y c om m i tt ed a c hi l d p orno graphy offense , (8) that T obi n c oul d be f

ur the re duc a t e d a boutthe ha r m s of pos s e s s i ng c hi l d pornogr aphy w i tho utbei ng i m pri soned, and (9) thatal l of these consi dera t i on s i nd i ca t ed that T obi n w a s a de qua t e l y de t e rr e d a nd the c om m uni ty pr ot e c t e d e ve n w i thout i m pri sonm ent . A s s uch, the di stri ctconsi dere d: (1) the nature a nd ci rc um st ance s of T obi n’ s of

f e ns e a nd T obi n’ s hi s t or y a nd c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s ; ( 2) the s e r i ous ne s s of the of f e ns e ; ( 3) de t e rr e nc e ; ( 4) pr ot e c t i on of the publ i c ; ( 4) the ne e d f ore duc a t i on and m edi ca l tre atm ent ; (5) the ki nd s of s ent ence s a vai l abl e; (6) the G ui del i nes ra ng e; and (7) avoi dance of unw arra nt ed se nt enci ng di spar i t i es . T hati s, the di stri ct c our tc ons i de r e d e ve ry s i ngl e § 3553( a ) f a c t ore xc e ptf

orthe ne e d t o pr ovi de r e s titu tio n , w h ic h w a s n o t ap p lic a b le in th is c a s e . See 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 7 ) . F u r th e r , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s e x p lic it s ta te m e n t th a t it h a d “s tru g g le d m ig h tily ” w ith se nt enci ng i n thi s c as e bef ore c on cl ud i ng thata G ui del i nes s ent ence w as9

appr opr i a t e be l i e s T obi n’ s a s s e r t i on the di s tr i c tc our ts i m pl y de f e rr e d t o the G u i d el i n es ran g e w i th o u tp ro p er co n si d erat i o n o f th e o th er § 3 5 5 3 (a) factors. I I . C ON C L US I ON T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otpl ai nl y e rrby no tdi sm i ss i ng the i nd i ctm entas v io la tin g T o b in ’s d u e p r o c e s s r ig h ts . M o r e o v e r , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t ab u s e its di s c r e t i on i n e xc l udi ng D i a z ’ s t e s t i m ony . F i na l l y , the di s tr i c tc our tdi d not se nt ence T ob i n u nd era m andat ory G ui del i nes s chem e, and h i s s ent ence w as procedural l y r ea sonabl e. T hu s, w e a ff i rm T ob i n’ s c on vi ct i on and sent ence . AF F I RME D.