# 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- 19 70

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

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.

St ev en Pet ers en

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 Nor th ern Dis tri ct of I owa - Ced ar Ra pi ds

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

9, 2 01 7
Fil ed : Fe br

ua ry 22 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , LOKE N and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

RILEY, Chi ef J ud ge

.

W hi le se rv in g hi s te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e, St ev en Pet ers en le ft a vo ic e m ai l

so li ci ti ng hi s da ug ht er to co m m it an as sa ul t on Pet ers en ’s be ha lf. The di st ric t co ur t 1

r ev ok ed Pet ers en ’s su pe rv is ed rel eas e an d co m m it te d Pet ers en to th e B u r e a u o f

The Hon or ab le Lin da R. Rea de

, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Nor th ern 1

Dis tri ct of I owa

.Pri so ns fo r 8 m on th s fo ll owe d b y on e y ear o f su pe rv is ed rel eas e. Pet ers en ap pe al s,

arg ui ng th ere was in su ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o fi nd he co m m it te d a ne w off

en se an d hi s

ne w se nt en ce is su bs ta nt iv el y un rea so na bl e. W e affi rm

. See 28 U.S.C. § 12 91
(ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ).

I. BACKGRO UND

Pet ers en pl ed gu il ty to be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm in vi ol at io n of

18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (1 ) an d 92 4( a)(2 ) in 20 08

. The di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced Pet ers en

to 78 m on th s im

pr is on m en t f

o l lo wed by a th ree- y ear te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e.

Pet ers en be ga n hi s te rm of su pe rv is ed r e l e as e in Aug us t 20 13

. Am on g ot he r

co nd it io ns , Pet ers en was pr oh ib it ed fro m un la wfu l dr ug us e, “ en te rin g ba rs , ta ve rn s,

or ot he r es ta bl is hm en ts who se pri m ary so ur ce o f in co m e is de riv ed fro m th e sa le of

al co ho l,” an d co m

m it ti ng a su bs eq ue nt fed eral

, st at e, or lo cal cri m e an d was req ui red

to su bm it to pe rio di c d ru g t es ti ng

.

Pet ers en in it ia ll y ha d di ffi c u l t i e s whi le on su pe rv is ed rel eas e, in cl ud in g

refu si ng to wor k wit h fem al e pr ob at io n of fic ers an d m ak in g th reat en in g st at em en ts

. In Feb ru ary 20 14 , Pet ers en fai le d a dr ug te st an d a dm it te d t o u si ng m ari juan a. The

di st ric t co ur t m od ifi ed th e co nd it io ns of Pet ers en ’s s up erv is ed rel eas e an d req ui red

hi m to se rv e two co ns ecu ti ve week en ds in jail in Mar ch 20 14

. Fo r al m os t two y ears

fo ll owi ng th is m od ifi cat io n, Pet ers en co m pl ie d wit h al l co nd it io ns of hi s su pe rv is ed

rel eas e, in cl ud in g co m

pl et in g su bs ta nc e ab us e an d men t a l he al th tre at m en t an d

su bm it ti ng to all dru g t es ts

.

In Feb ru ary 20 16

, whi le st il l on su pe rv is ed rel eas e, Pet ers en at te nd ed a

m em or ia l he ld at a ba r, in te nd in g to m eet fri en ds

. Pet ers en di d no t en te r th e ba r it se lf,

bu t sa t at a ta bl e lo cat ed on th e pa ti o of th e ba r. At hi s se nt en ci ng he ari ng , Pet ers en
ad m it te d to en t eri ng th e sa m e ba r se ve ral m on th s pr io r. The ba r’s m an ag er, Bet ty

Co le

, req ue st ed th at he r fri en d

, Kath y Sp ei ch er, te ll Pet ers en to le av e. Sp ei ch er

ap pr oa ch ed Pet ers en an d to ld hi m Co le di d no t wan t Pet ers en at th e ba r. Acco rd in g

-2

-t o S p e i c h e r , Pet ers en was “ pl eas an t” an d “ ni ce” to he r, bu t as he tu rn ed to le av e ,

Pet ers en to ld Sp ei ch er to rel ay to Co le th at “ I’m co m in g ba ck an d we’re go in g to ha ve

wor ds .” Sp ei ch er te st ifi ed Pet ers en th en sa id “ No, y ou te ll he r th at I’m co m in g ba ck

,

an d I’m go in g to ge t in he r face an d we’re g oi ng to ha ve wor ds ” an d fo ll owe d th at

co m m en t wit h “ No, y ou te ll he r I’m co m in g ba ck

, an d I’m br in gi ng a gu n.” Pet ers en
de ni ed th is ve rs io n of ev en ts

, y et di d ad m it “ [i]f [h e] sa id an y th in g li ke th at

, [h e] sa id

, ‘T el l Bet ty to ge t he r gu n.’” Sp ei ch er a n d P e t e r s e n ag reed Pet ers en th en le ft th e

pr em is es

.

S h o rtl y aft er Pet ers en le ft, he cal le d hi s da ug ht er, Ben it a Pet ers en , who was

in si de th e b ar fo r th e m em or ia l. Pet ers en lef t h is da ug ht er a vo ic e m ai l in whi ch he

sa id : “ [Co le ] jus t th rew m e ou t of

. . . [th e ba r] an d I wan t he r

. . . he ad an d y ou ’re th e

wom an en ou gh to do it

. . . . I di d a job f o r y ou on ce no w I wan na ret ur n th e fav or , bu st he r

. . . no se

. I’ll pa y y a a hu nd red do ll ars an d I’ll pa y al l y ou r fin es

. Go in th ere

an d b us t h er as s u p, al rig ht

. . . Pl eas e? Than k you bye.” (Las t ell ip si s in or ig in al ).

Pet ers en te st ifi ed he was jus t “ ve n t in g” an d di d no t in te nd act ua ll y to hi re hi s
da ug ht er to as sa ul t Co le ; ho wev er, Pet ers en ne ve r co nt act ed Ben it a to te ll he r he di d

no t wan t he r to as sa ul t Co le

. Ben it a la te r pl ay ed th e m es sa ge fo r he r fia nc é, who th en

in fo rm ed Co le of P et ers en ’s com m en ts

.

Co le rep or te d th e de ta il s of th e in ci de nt to a de pu ty sh eri ff, bu t ch o s e no t to

writ e ou t a st at em en t. Ch arg es su bs eq ue nt ly were fil ed ag ai ns t Pet ers en in st at e co ur t

fo r so li ci ta ti on to co m

m it an ag gr av at ed m is de m ean or in vi ol at io n of Io wa Co de
§ 70 5.1 (3 ). Pet ers en ’s pr ob a t io n of fic er fil ed a pe ti ti on to rev ok e Pet ers en ’s

su pe rv is ed rel eas e ba se d on fo ur vi ol at io ns : fai lu re to co m pl y wit h dr ug te st in g in

Feb ru ary 20 14

, us e of a co nt ro ll ed su bs ta nc e in Feb ru ary 20 14

, a ne w vi ol at io n ba se d

on th e F e b r u a ry 20 16 in ci de nt res ul ti ng in th e st at e ch arg e fo r so li ci ta ti on , an d

en te rin g a ba r in Feb ru ary 20 16

.

-3

-At a rev oc at io n he ari ng he ld Apr il 19

, 20 16

, th e di st ric t co ur t ex pl ic it ly rel ie d

on st at em en ts m ad e by Sp ei ch er, th e de pu ty s he rif f, an d Ben it a an d fo un d Pet ers en

n o t to ta ll y cred ib le

. The di st ric t co ur t fo un d Pet ers en co m m it te d th e ne w c r i me o f

so li ci ta ti on to co m

m it an ag gr av at ed m is de m ean or , whi ch it tre a te d as a gr ad e C 2

vi ol at io n un de r Un i t e d St at es Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s (U.S.S.G. or Gui de li ne s)
§ 7B 1.1 (a)( 3)

. Bas ed on th at vi ol at io n an d Pet ers en ’s cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y II at

th e ti m e of hi s or ig in al se nt en ci ng , th e Gui de li ne s ran ge of im pr is on m en t was 4 to 10

m on th s. See id

. § 7B 1.4

. The go ve rn m en t req ue st ed a rev oc at io n se nt en ce wit hi n th e
Gui de li ne s ran ge , bu t Pet ers en as ke d fo r no m or e th an 30 da y s in jail

. Th e d i s t r ic t

co ur t co ns id ered th e 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) fact or s an d no te d Pet ers en ha d a hi st or y of

m en ta l il ln es s, su bs ta nc e ab us e, an d vi ol en t te nd en ci es a n d w as a hi gh ris k to

reci di va te

. The di st ric t co ur t rev ok ed Pet ers en ’s su pe rv is ed rel eas e an d se nt en ced

hi m to 8 m on th s im

pr is on m en t fo ll owe d by a on e-year te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e.

Pet ers en fil ed th is ti m el y ap pe al

, as se rti ng (1 ) th e ev id en ce was in su ffi ci en t to sh ow by a pr ep on de ran ce th at he co m m it te d a ne w of

fen se , an d (2 ) 8 m on th s im pr is on m en t

was a su bs ta nt iv el y

un reas on ab le sen te nc e.

II

. DISCUSS IO N

A di st ric t co ur t m ay “ rev ok e su pe rv is ed rel eas e if th e go ve rn m en t pr ov es by

a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce th at th e de fen da nt vi ol at ed a co nd it io n of su pe rv is ed

rel eas e.” Uni te d St at es v. Bo y d, 7 9 2 F.3 d 91 6, 91 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ); se e al so

18 U.S.C. § 35 83 (e ) ( 3 )

. W e rev ie w su ch a rev oc at io n de ci si on fo r ab us e of

di sc ret io n, an d w e r e vi ew an y fin di ng s of fact as to whe th er or no t a vi ol at io n

oc cu rred fo r cl ear e r r o r

. S e e Bo y d, 79 2 F.3 d at 91 9. W e rev ers e a rev oc at io n

In im po si ng th e se nt en ce, th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t co ns id er th at Pet ers en 2

vi ol at ed hi s te rm s of su pe rv is ed rel eas e by en te rin g a ba r be cau se “tha t m ig ht be

qu es ti on ed by an ap pe ll at e co ur t,” bu t d id fin d Pet ers en was on pr op ert y th at

co ns ti tu te d a ba r.

-4

-de ci si on on ly if we ha ve “ ‘a de fin it e an d fir m co nv ic ti on th at th e Dis tri ct Co ur t was

m is ta ke n.’” Id

. (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. W il li s, 43 3 F.3 d 63 4, 63 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 )).

The di st ric t co ur t fo un d by a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id e n c e Pet ers en

c om m it te d th e st at e cri m e of so li ci ti ng an ag gr av at ed m is de m ean or

. I o w a C o d e § 70 5.1 pr oh ib it s “ co m

m an d[ in g], en tre at [in g], or ot he rwis e at te m pt [in g] to pe rs ua de
[an ot he r] pe rs on to co m

m it a pa rti cu la r fel on y or ag gr av at ed m is de m ean or , wit h th e

in te nt th at su ch act be do ne an d un de r ci rcu m st an ces whi ch co rro bo rat e[] th at in te nt .”

Ass au lt wit h in te nt to in fli ct se rio us in jury up on an o t h e r is an ag gr av at ed

m is de m ean or

. See id

. § 70 8.2 (1 ). At t h e rev oc at io n he ari ng , th e go ve rn m en t

in tro du ced in to ev id en ce th e vo ic e m ai l Pet ers en le ft fo r Ben it a req ue st in g sh e “ bu st
[Co le ’s]

. . . no se ” in ex ch an ge fo r $1 00 an d pa y m en t of an y su bs eq ue nt f i ne s.

Pet ers en ’s own wor ds are su ffi ci en t ev id en ce he at te m pt ed to pe rs ua de Ben it a to

co m m it th e p art ic ul ar ag gr av at ed m is de m ean or of a ss au lt

.

Pet ers en co nt en ds th ere was no ev id en ce he su bjec t i v e l y in te nd ed to so li ci t

Ben it a to co m

m it an ag gr av at ed m is de m ean or

. “ Bec au se it is di ffi cu lt to pr ov e in te nt by di rect ev id en ce, pr oo f of in te nt us ua ll y co ns is ts of ci rcu m st an ti al ev id en ce an d th e

in fere nc es th at can be dra wn fr om th at ev id en ce.” St at e v. Grant , 72 2 N.W.2d 6 45

, 64 7- 48 (Io wa 20 06 ). Bo th Pet ers en an d Ben it a te st ifi ed Pet ers en was jus t “ ve nt in g.”

Howev er, Pet ers en al so te st ifi ed he “ m ay be ” wou ld ha ve fo ll owe d th ro ug h with th e

so li ci ta ti on if B en it a h ad cal le d h im ba ck to acce pt hi s o ffer be cau se he was “ be in g

tre at ed so po or ly,” an d Ben it a te st ifi ed sh e un de rs to od Pet ers en ’s m es sa ge to m ean

Pet ers en wou ld in fact pa y he r $1 00 an d he r fin es if sh e as sa ul te d Co le

. In ad di ti on , Pet ers en ’s th r e a te ni ng co m m en ts m ad e to Sp ei ch er an d th en Pet ers en ’s own

te st im on y de m on st rat e he was “ up se t” wit h Co le

. Pet ers en te st ifi ed he ne ve r cal le d

Ben it a aft er le av in g th e vo ic e m ai l an d ne ve r at te m pt ed to wit hd raw hi s of

fer of

pa y m en t fo r th e as sa ul t. The di st ric t co ur t d id no t cl earl y err i n fi nd in g t he se fact s,

an d ta ke n to ge th er , t h e s e f act s sh ow by a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce Pet ers en

-5

-so li ci te d Ben it a to as sa ul t Co l e a n d t hu s vi ol at ed a co nd it io n of hi s su pe rv is ed

rel eas e.

Pet ers en al so c h a ll en ge s hi s 8 m on th s im pr is on m en t as su bs ta nt iv el y

un reas on ab le

. “ W e rev ie w th e su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss of a se nt en ce fo r ab us e of

di sc ret io n.” Uni te d St at es v. Harl an , 81 5 F.3 d 11 00

, 11 07 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ). A di st ric t

co ur t ab us es it s di sc ret io n in se nt en ci ng “i f th e di st ric t co ur t ‘fail s to co ns id er a
rel ev an t fact or th at sh ou ld ha ve rece iv ed si gn ifi can t weig ht

, gi ve s si gn ifi can t weig ht

to an im pr op er or irr el ev an t fact or , or co ns id ers on ly t h e a p p r op ria te fact or s bu t

co m m it s a cl ear erro r of jud gm en t in weig hi ng th o s e f a c t o r s .’ ” Uni te d St at es v.

Loz oya, 62 3 F.3 d 6 2 4

, 6 2 6 ( 8t h Ci r. 20 10 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. W at so n, 48 0

F.3 d 11 75

, 11 77 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 )). W e m ay ap pl y a pr es um pt io n of reas on ab le ne ss to

a se nt en ce wit hi n th e Gui de li ne s ran ge

. S e e G a l l v . Un it ed St at es , 5 52 U.S. 3 8, 51
(2 00 7)

. “ ‘[I] t wil l be th e un us ua l cas e whe n we rev ers e a di st ric t co ur t

se nt en ce— whe th er wit hi n, ab ov e, or be lo w th e ap pl ic ab le Gui de li ne s ran ge —as

su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le .’ ” Uni te d St at es v. Feem st er, 57 2 F.3 d 45 5, 46 4 (8 th Ci r.

20 09 ) (en ba nc ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Gard el li ni

, 54 5 F.3 d 10 89

, 10 90 (D.C. Ci r.

20 08 )).

As Pet ers en po in ts ou t, he co m pl i e d wit h al l co nd it io ns of hi s su pe rv is ed

rel eas e fo r th e ne arl y two y ears im m ed ia te ly p rece di ng th e cu rren t in ci de nt , yet th e
di st ric t cou rt had pr ev io us ly m od ifi ed hi s te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e in Mar ch 20 14

fo r fai lu r e t o co m

pl y wit h dr ug te st in g. The di st ric t co ur t hi gh li gh te d Pet ers en ’s

co m pl et io n of a dr

ug ed uc at io n pr og ram , bu t al so m en ti on ed Pet ers en ’s di sc ip li na ry

pr ob le m s whi le co m

pl et in g th at pr og ram

. In se tt in g Pet ers en ’s se nt en ce, th e di st ric t

co ur t ex pl ic it ly “ co ns id ered th e fact or s at 18 [ U .S.C.] § 35 53 (a),” de te rm in ed

“ Pet ers en po se s a ris k to th e pu bl ic sa fet y ,” an d fo un d Pet ers en ’s own te st im on y an d

pr io r co nv ic ti o n s , in cl ud in g carr y in g a weap on an d as sa ul t cau si ng bo di ly in jury,

de m on st rat e “ vi ol en t te nd en ci es .” Pet e r s e n d o e s no t po in t to an y “ ‘relev an t fact or

th at sh ou ld ha ve rece iv ed si gn ifi can t weig ht ’” or gi ve an y ot he r in di cat io n th e di st ric t

-6

-co ur t co m

m it te d a “ ‘clear erro r of jud gm en t in w ei gh in g’” th e rel ev an t fact or s.

Loz oya, 62 3 F.3 d at 62 6 (q uo ti ng W at s o n, 48 0 F.3 d at 11 77 ). Thi s is no t th e

“ ‘unu su al cas e’” whe re a se nt en ce is su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le

. Feem st er, 57 2 F.3 d

at 46 4 (q uo ti ng Gard el li ni , 54 5 F .3d at 1 09 0)

.

II I. CONCLUSI ON

Fi nd in g n o e rro r an d n o a bu se of d is cret io n, we af fir m

.

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

-7

-