## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H

C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 1- 21 51

__ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *

* App el le e, *

* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s

v. * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e
* Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta

. Cal vi n R ay

W as hi ng to n, *

* [UNPUBLISHED] App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 13 , 20 12 Fi le d: May

2, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re WOL LMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ _
PER CURI AM.

Cal vi n Ray Wash in gt on vi ol at ed th e te rm s of hi s su pe rv is ed rel eas e an d was

se nt en ced to twen ty-on e m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, wit h no su pe rv is ed rel eas e to fo ll ow. He ap pe al s, arg ui ng th at th e di st ric t co ur t im po se d an un reas on ab le se nt en ce. W e 1
affi rm

.

The Hon or ab le Dav id S. Dot y , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct of

1 Mi nn es ot a.I.

In Ju ly 20 09
, W as hi ng to n pl ead ed gu il ty to po ss es si on of st ol en m ai l
, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 17 08

. He was se nt en ced to fo ur te en m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, fo ll owe d by th ree y ears ’ su pe rv is ed rel eas e. W as hi ng to n was rel eas ed fro m cu st od y

on Ja nu ary 27
, 20 10
, an d be ga n hi s te rm of su pe rv is io n. The m an da to ry co nd it io ns 2
of hi s rele as e in cl ud ed th at “ [t]he de fen da nt sh al l no t com m it an ot he r fed eral
, st at e,

or lo cal cri m e.” Des ig na te d R. 8 (te rm s of su pe rv is ed rel eas e). As a sp eci al co nd it io n of su pe rv is io n, Wash in gt on was a ls o re qu ire d t o re po rt f or uri na lysis tes ti ng

.

On J ul y 26 , 20 10
, pro ba ti on off

ic er J oi Kver n p et it io ne d t he di st ric t co ur t t o

rev ok e W as hi ng to n’s su pe rv is ed rel ease, as se rt ing th at W as hi ng to n ha d be en arre st ed i n M i nn eap ol is
, Mi nn es ot a, fo r th e of fen se of bu rg la ry of a bu si ne ss

. Kve rn la te r fil ed two am en de d pe ti ti on s: th e fir st st at ed th at W as hi ng to n ha d fai le d to rep or t fo r

ur in al y si s te st in g ap po i n t men t s , an d th e se co nd al le ge d th at W as hi ng to n ha d be en

arre st ed in St

. Pau l, Mi nn es ot a, fo r po ss es si on of th eft to ol s. The di st ric t co ur t he ld 2

a fin al rev oc at io n he ari ng on May 1 2, 2 01 1. Wash in gt on ad m it te d t ha t h e fai le d to
rep or t fo r ur in al y si s t es ti ng , bu t d en ie d t ha t h e co m m it te d b ur gl ary of

a bu si ne ss

.

At th e fin al rev o c a t i o n he ari ng , Kve rn te st ifi ed reg ard in g he r su pe rv is io n of
W as hi ng to n, th e pe ti ti on s sh e ha d fil ed
, an d cert ai n sp eci al co nd it i o n s of
W as hi ng to n’s rel eas e, in cl ud in g co gn it iv e be ha vi or al tra in in g an d m en ta l he al th

tre at m en t. Mi nn eap ol is po li ce of fic er Ada m Ch ard te st ifi ed reg ard in g W as hi ng to n’s

arre st fo r bu r g l ary of a bu si ne ss

. On Ju ly 14
, 20 10
, Ch ard res po nd ed to a di sp at ch

W as hi ng to n pl ead ed gu il ty in th e Dis tri ct of So ut h Dak ot a. Fo l l o w i n g h is 2 rel eas e, su pe rv is io n was tra ns ferr ed to th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta

.
Bec au se of th e r e c e n c y of th e arre st fo r po ss es si on of th eft to ol s, th e 2
go ve rn m en t di d no t of

fer ev id en ce reg a r d i n g th at of fen se to pr ov e a su pe rv is ed rel eas e v io la ti on

.
-2

-n o t i f

i cat io n of an al arm so un di ng at a bu si ne ss on Hen ne pi n Ave nu e. As Ch ard
ap pr oa ch ed th e bu si ne ss in hi s pa tro l car, he sa w two m en at te m pt in g to sh ov e a la rg e

sa fe in to th e fro nt pa ss en ge r se a t of a Toyota Cam ry

. Ch ard st op pe d hi s ve hi cl e,

ex it ed
, dr ew hi s gu n, an d or de red th e two m en to th e gr ou nd

. W as hi ng to n co m pl ie d.
Des pi te th e he at of th e Ju ly ev en in g, W as hi ng to n was weari ng bl ack gl ov es , a bl ack

swe at su it
, an d bl ack sh oe s. Scu ff m ark s le d fro m th e bu si ne ss ’s ba ck do or , acro ss th e al le y , to th e Cam ry , whe re a la rg e sa fe was pa rti al ly lo ad ed in to th e car. Ch ard fo un d

to ol s an d a dd it io na l b la ck clo th in g wh en he sea rch ed th e car

.

The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at W as hi ng to n ha d co m m it te d a st at e cri m e an d th at th e go ve rn m en t ha d m et it s bu rd en of pr oo f th at W as hi ng to n vi ol at ed a m an da to ry

co nd it io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. Befo re im po si ng W as hi ng to n’s se nt en ce, th e di st ric t

co ur t s ta te d:

[T]he Co ur t do es co ns id er th e po li cy st at em en ts in C h a p t e r 7 of th e
se nt en ci ng gu id el in es reg ard in g vi ol at io ns of co nd it io ns of su pe rv is io n
an d th e pe ti ti on a n d t he fil es in th e m at te r, an d pu rs ua nt to Gui de li ne Sect io n 7B 1.4 (a) th e Co ur t ha s de te rm in ed th at

. . . [t]he g r a d e of vi ol at io n i s an A wit h a cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y of III m ig ht lea d t o a te rm of i m pr is on m en t o f 18 to 24 m on th s.

Hr’g. Tr. 48

. Defen se co un se l arg ue d th at a se nt en ce of e i g h te en to twen ty-fou r

m ont hs ’ im pr is on m en t was ex ces si ve , gi ve n th at W as hi ng to n ha d co m pl ie d w ith m ost of th e req ui rem en ts of hi s rel eas e. Rec og ni zi ng th at “ th e im po rta nt pa rt he re is ne w cri m in al be ha vi or [,]” de fen se co un se l ex pl ai ne d th at W as hi ng to n “ cam e to be at th is pl ace by acci de nt es se nt ia ll y ” an d th at W as hi ng to n was be in g p a i d to he lp an

ac q u a i n t a n ce m ov e. Id

. at 49

. Alt ho ug h de fen se co un se l fo un d W as hi ng to n’s

reco un t of th e fact s “ a bi t to o co nv en ie nt ,” he st at ed th at W as hi ng to n was “ ad am an t in th e tru th of hi s— wha t’s ha pp en ed he re.” Id

. at 50

. Defen se co un se l req ue st ed th at W as hi ng to n be se nt en ced to ni n e t o t w el ve m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, wit h no

su pe rv is io n t o fo ll ow.

-3

-In res po ns e to th e di st ric t co ur t’s in qu iry whe th er W as hi ng to n wou ld li ke to

sp eak
, W as hi ng to n st at ed th at he was tryin g to be a la w ab id in g ci ti zen , to be tt er hi s

so ci al sk il ls
, an d to le arn ho w to de al wit h pe op le

. He s p o k e r eg ard in g hi s

su pe rv is io n a nd ex pl ai ne d t ha t h e th ou gh t h e “ di d wha t [h e] need ed to do to st ay in

so ci et y .” Id . at 5 4.

The di st ric t co ur t th en se n t en ced W as hi ng to n to twen ty-on e m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, st at in g th at it ha d “ co ns id ered th e na tu re an d ci rcu m st an ces of th e de fen da nt ’s of

fen se an d hi s hi st or y an d ch arac te ris ti cs an d fin ds th at th e se nt en ce im po se d refl ect s th e se rio us ne ss of th e of fen se , do es pr om ot e res pe ct fo r th e la w, an d
pr ov id es jus t p un is hm en t fo r th e su pe rv is ed rel eas e v io la ti on .” Id . at 5 9.

II.

“ W e r e v i e w a di st ric t co ur t’s se nt en ce on rev oc at io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e fo r

. . . su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss un de r th e sa m e reas on ab le ne ss st an da rd th at
ap pl ie s to in it ia l se nt en ci ng pr oc eed in gs .” Uni te d St at es v. Gro wde n, 66 3 F.3 d 98 2, 98 4 (8 th Cir . 20 11 ) (p er curi am ) (q uo ta ti on s an d c it at io ns om it te d) . 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 un de r a de fere nt ia l ab us e-o f-d is cret io n
st an da rd
, Gall v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2 U

. S

. 3 8
, 5 1 (2 00 7)
, an d we pr es um e th at a

se nt en ce im

po se d wit hi n th e ad vi s or y gu id el in e ran ge is su bs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le
, Uni te d St at es v. Pet rei ki s, 55 1 F.3 d 82 2, 82 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). “ A di st ric t co ur t ab us es it s di sc ret io n a n d im

po se s an un reas on ab le se nt en ce whe n it fai ls to co ns id er a rel ev an t an d si gn ifi can t fact or , gi ve s si gn ifi can t weig ht to an irr el ev an t or im pr op er fact or , or co ns id ers th e ap pr 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 os e fact or s.” Gro wde n, 66 3 F.3 d at 98 4 (q uo ta ti on s an d ci ta ti on s

om it te d)

.

W as hi ng to n arg ue s th at hi s se nt en ce is un reas on ab le be cau se it is lo ng er th an

ne ces sa ry to acco m

pl is h th e go al s of se nt en c i n g

. S p eci fic al ly, he arg ue s th at “ th e

-4

-di st ric t co ur t ga ve in su ffi ci en t weig ht to th e pa rti cu la r di ffi cu lt ie s en ge nd ered by hi s

effo rts to rei nt eg rat e hi m se lf in to so ci e t y” a n d arg ue s th at th e co ur t fai le d to

“ m ean in gf

ul ly wei gh Mr. W as hi ng to n’s co ns is te nt an d p e rs is te nt effo rts to co m pl y wit h al l of th e co nd it io ns of hi s rel eas e.” App el la nt ’s Br. 10

. The di st ric t co ur t, ho wev er, ha s su bs ta nt ia l di sc ret io n in de te rm in in g ho w to weig h th e rel ev an t fact or s li st ed in 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a). See 18 U.S.C. § 35 83 (e)( 3) ( l i s t i n g t h e § 35 53 (a) fact or s to co ns id er whe n rev ok in g a te rm of su pe rv is ed rel eas e). As se t fo rth ab ov e, th e di st ric t co ur t he ard pr ob at io n of fic er Kve rn ’s te st im on y reg ard in g cert ai n sp eci al

co ndi ti on s of W as hi ng to n’s su pe rv is ed rel eas e, as well as de fen se co un se l’ s ar gum en t th at W as hi ng to n ha d su bs ta nt ia ll y co m pl ie d wit h th e co nd it io ns of hi s rel eas e. It al so he ard W as hi ng to n’s ex pl an at io n of hi s effo rts to rei nt eg rat e in to so ci et y

. The di st ric t

co ur t was th us co gn iz an t o f W as hi ng to n’s ef fo rts to m eet hi s o bl ig at io ns

.

W as hi ng to n fu rth er co nt en ds th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t ad eq ua te ly ad dr es s it s reas on s for im

po si ng th e se nt en ce. “ Bu t whe th er th e co ur t adeq ua te ly ex pl ai ne d th e se nt en ce is a m at te r of pr oc ed ur al so un dn es s, no t su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss , an d in an y ev en t, ‘not ev ery reas on ab le arg um en t ad va nc ed by a de fen da nt req ui res a
sp eci fic rejo in de r by th e jud ge .’ ” Uni te d St at es v. Mo rai s, 67 0 F. 3 d 8 8 9
, 89 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Gray
, 53 3 F.3 d 94 2, 94 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 )). W e

ar e sa tis fie d th at th e reco rd ad eq ua te ly su pp or ts th e co ur t’s gu id el in es -r an ge se nte nc e. See Gray
, 53 3 F.3 d at 94 4 (“ W he re a se nt en ci ng jud ge im po se s a se nt en ce wit hi n th e ad vi so ry gu id el in e ran ge , ‘[c] irc um st an ces m ay well m ak e cl ear’ t h a t t h e jud ge be li ev ed th e cas e was typic al
, an d ‘rest [ed ] hi s de ci si on up on th e Co m m is si on ’s own

reas on in g th at th e Gui de li ne s se nt en ce is a pr op er se nt en ce.’” (q uo ti ng Ri ta v. Uni te d
St at es , 55 1 U.S. 3 38 , 35 7 (2 00 7) ).

III.

The sen te nc e is affi rm ed

.

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

-5

-