# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

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

No. 1 7- 27 26

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

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.

Larry Lee Hen de rs on

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 Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Apri l 1 2, 2 01 8
Fi le d: Aug us t 3 0, 2 01 8

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re SM ITH, Chi ef J ud ge , W OLLMAN and LOKEN, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

SMI TH, Chi ef J ud ge

.

Larry Lee Hen de rs on ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t’s rev oc at io n of hi s 1

su pe rv is ed rel eas e, cl ai m in g in su ffi ci en cy of th e ev id en ce. He al so co nt en ds th at two

sp eci al co nd it io ns of hi s su pe rv is ed rel e a s e ( 1 ) a r e no t reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e 18

The Hon or ab le Hen ry E. Aut rey, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1

Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.U.S.C. § 35 83 (d ) se nt en ci ng fact or s; (2 ) in vo lv e a gr eat er de pr iv at io n of li be rty th an

reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry ; an d (3 ) are in c on si st en t wit h th e pe rti ne nt Sen te nc in g

Co m m is si on po li cy

st at em en ts . W e aff

irm.

I. Bac kg ro un d

A. Ori gi na l Co nv ic ti on

In Feb ru ary 20 14

, whi le co m pl et in g a pr is on te rm at a Bu reau of P r i s on s

ha lfwa y ho us e, Hen de rs on frau du le nt ly pu rch as ed a car. As la id ou t in th e un di sp ut ed

pr es en te nc e in ve st ig at io n rep or t (PSR ), Hen de rs on ob tained a 20 04 Ch ev ro le t Tah oe ,
pr ic ed at $1 3,8 71 .50

, fro m Driv er Seat Aut o Sal es , LLC (“ Driv er Seat Aut o” ), in St

. Ch arl es , Mis so ur i. Hen de rs on id en ti fie d h im se lf a s b is ho p, p as to r, an d c ha irman of

t h e H o l y Tem

pl e Nati on al Ass em

bl y of Ch ur ch es , In c., al so kn own as th e W or l d

Co un ci l of th e Nati on al Ass em bl y of Ch ur ch es , In c. To mak e th e pu rch as e,

Hen de rs on pr es en te d th e c a r d eal ers hi p wit h a $1 ,20 0 ch eck as do wn pa y m en t. To

ob ta in fin an ci ng fo r th e r e mai n d e r of th e pu rch as e pr ic e, Hen de rs on co m pl et ed an

on li ne lo an ap pl ic at io n, whe re he fal se ly cl ai m ed to be em pl oyed by th e “ US

Eccl es ia st ic al Co ur t,” dr awin g a sa la ry of $5 ,80 0 pe r m on th

. PSR at 5, Uni te d St at es

v. Hen de rs on , No. 4 : 1 4 -cr- 00 20 7- HEA (E.D. Mo

. Nov

. 3, 20 14 ), ECF No. 32

. He

pr od uc ed two pa y st ub s pu rp or te dl y fro m th e “ US Eccl es ia st ic al Co ur t,” as well as a

20 13 W ag e an d Tax St at em en t (W-2) fro m th e sa m e co m pa ny. I d

. Th e W -2 no te d 2

Hen de rs on ’s sa la ry at $6 2,8 82 .56

. Bas ed on th e fal se in fo rm at io n he pr ov id ed

, Hen de rs on rece iv ed ap pr ov al fo r hi s on li ne fin an ci ng ap pl ic at io n, an d Hen de rs on
dr ov e away in t he Taho e.

Hen de rs on ’s do wn pa y m en t ch eck to Driv er S eat Aut o bo un ced

. Its ba nk

in fo rm ed th e de al ers hi p th at th e ch eck cam e fro m a cl os ed acco un t. The co m pa ny

th en co nt act ed Hen de rs on , who —af te r m ul ti pl e co ll ect io n a t te m

pt s— pr om is ed to

Hen de rs on was no t em

pl oyed du rin g th es e ti m es , as he sp en t m os t of th e 2

pr ev io us eig ht y ears in pri so n.

-2

-m ak e go od on th e do wn pa y m en t. Two mo n t h s la te r, Hen de rs on pa id th e co m pa ny
wit h a cas hi er’s ch eck

, sa ti sf y in g th e do wn pa y m en t am ou nt

. Aro un d th e sa m e ti m e,

Hen de rs on frau du le nt ly pr oc ur ed a Mi ss ou ri Dep art m en t of Rev en ue Not ic e of Lien

Rel eas e (“ Lien Rel eas e” ) fo r th e Tah oe

. He th en us ed th at do cu m en t to ap pl y
fo r—a nd rece iv e—a $4 ,00 0 lo an fro m th e Mi ss ou ri Tit le Loa n Co m pa ny in St

. Lou is

, Mi ss ou ri. On hi s lo an ap pl ic at io n, Hen de rs on cl ai m ed —fa ls el y —t o be em

pl oyed by

an en ti ty cal le d “ US Leg al ,” wit h a sa la ry of $2 ,37 0 ev ery two week s. Id

. Hen de rs on

su bs eq ue nt ly cas he d th e $4 ,00 0 ch eck ; he ke pt $2 ,00 0 as cas h an d pl aced $2 ,00 0 as

a cas hi er’s ch eck pa y ab le to th e Hol y Tem pl e Nati on al Ass em

bl y Ch ur ch

. Hen de rs on

al so rece iv ed an ot he r lo an fro m Mi ss ou ri Tit le Loa n fo r $1 ,20 0 ba se d on th e fo rg ed

Lien Rel eas e an d t h e f

al se in fo rm at io n he pr ev io us ly pr ov id ed to th e co m pa ny.
Thro ug ho ut th is ti m e pe rio d, He n d e r s on wire d m ul ti pl e pa y m en ts fo r th e fin an ced

Tah oe . Howev er, on ly o ne of th e pa y m en ts was c red it ed . The o th ers fai le d b ecau se

th e o rig in at in g b an k a cco un ts eit he r la ck ed su ffi ci en t fu nd s o r were n on ex is te nt

.

A gr an d jury in di ct ed Hen de rs on on two co un ts : wire frau d, in vi ol at io n of 18

U.S.C. § 13 43

, an d m ai l frau d, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 13 41

. Hen de rs on pl ead ed

gu il ty to wire frau d, an d in ex ch an ge th e go ve rn m en t di sm is se d th e m ai l frau d ch arg e.

W hi le Hen de rs on awai te d se nt en ci ng , pr ob at i o n o f fic ers un co ve red an ot he r on e of

hi s fr au d s ch em es :

[A]ge nt s le arn ed th at Hen de rs on was pl an ni ng to st art a ne w bu si ne ss

na m ed th e Co m

m it te e fo r Ex

- O ffen de rs Equ al it y Ass oc ia ti on , whi ch

a pp eare d to be an au xi li ary to Hen de rs on ’s Hol y Tem pl e Na t i o n a l
Ass em bl y Ch ur ch

. . . . Hen de rs on so ug ht to ren t pr op ert y whi ch was ad ve rti se d fo r le as e on Crai gs li st

. Th e pr op ert y in cl ud ed a bu si ne ss l oc at io n an d a res id en ce in Fl or is sa nt

, Mi ss ou ri. Sp eci fic al ly, i n J u n e 20 14

, Hen de rs on co nt act ed Mei ne ck e Ent erp ris e s an d arra ng ed a

m eet in g to di sc us s t h e l e a se of th e pr op ert y in Fl or is sa nt

, Mi ss ou ri.

Hen de rs on an d hi s as so ci at e

. . . a n d a n un kn own m al e m et wit h

Me i ne ck e an d ag reed to le as e th e pr op ert y an d po ss ib ly pu rch as e th e
pr op ert y by Aug us t 31

, 20 14

. The ren t a l a p p l ic at io n no te d th at th e

-3

-ap pl ic an t was th e Hol y Tem pl e Ch ur ch an d th e bu si ne ss at th e lo cat io n

was to be na m ed Co m

m it te e Cen te r of Hol y Tem pl e Out reac h. On Ju ly 1, 20 14

, Hen de rs on pr ov id ed Mei ne ck e th ree ch eck s to ta li ng $4 ,30 0.0 0.
Afte r at te m

pt in g to de po si t th e ch eck s, on Ju ly 3, 20 14

, th e ch eck s were
ret ur ne d as co un te rfei t as th ey pu rp or te d to be dr awn on a no n- ex is te nt

acco un t l oc at ed at C la y to n B an k wh ic h i s l oc at ed in Tenn es se e.

Id

. at 6– 7 (b ol d om it te d)

. The PSR al so reco un te d Hen de rs on ’s th ree p rio r fed eral

c o n v i c t io ns fo r ba nk frau d, m an uf act ur e of fo rg ed se cu rit ie s, an d un la wfu l us e o f

co un te rfei te d s ecu rit ie s.

H e n d e r so n’s to ta l of

fen se le ve l of ni ne an d cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y V I

y ie ld ed a Gui de li ne s reco m m en de d ran ge of 2 1 to 27 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. At

se nt en ci ng , th e go ve rn m en t vo ic ed it s co nc ern s reg ard in g Hen de rs on ’s hi st or y of

no nc om pl ia nc e whi le on su pe rv is ed rel eas ed

. It al so ad vo cat ed fo r a se nt en ce at th e

hi gh en d of th e Gui de li ne s ran ge , as ki ng th e co ur t to ta ke in to acco un t Hen de rs on ’s

le ng th y cri m in al hi st or y in vo lv in g m is rep res en ta ti on

. The go ve rn m en t th en as ke d th e
di st ric t co ur t t o im

po se as a sp eci al co nd it io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e th at Hen de rs on

“ can no t act in an y cap aci ty fo r an y em pl oyer, in cl ud in g a ch ur ch or no np ro fit en ti ty,

in ei th er a sa la rie d or vo lu nt eer cap aci ty, to in cl ud e a bo ard m em be r or c o n s u l t a nt

w i t h o ut th e pr io r ap pr ov al of th e U.S. Pro ba ti on Offi ce.” Sen te nc in g Hr’g Tr. a t 9

, Uni te d St at es v. Hen de rs on , No. 4:1 4- cr-0 02 07 -HEA (E.D. Mo . Jan . 7, 2 01 5) , ECF

No. 6 0.

Hen de rs on ob

jecte d, av erri ng th at th e pr op os ed co nd it io n in a p p r o pr ia te ly

res tri ct ed hi s em

pl oym en t an d in fri ng ed on hi s rig ht s un de r th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t. He

su gg es te d t ha t t he co ur t i ns te ad im po se co nd it io ns th at pro hi bi t hi m fro m “ op en in g

n e w [ b a n k ] acco un ts

, . . . us in g ch eck s, [an d req ui re hi m to ] ha v[ e] a di ffer e n t

fin an ci al of

fic er at th e ch ur ch to ha nd le th e fin an ces .” Id

. at 10

. The di st ric t co ur t

ad op te d Hen de rs on ’s reco m m en da ti on an d o rd ered th at

-4

-[Hen de rs on sh al l] no t be se lf- em pl o yed or be em

pl oyed as a

“ co ns ul ta nt ”

. . . wit ho ut th e writ te n pe rm is si on of th e Pro ba ti on Offi ce. [Hen de rs o n s h al l] n ot be em pl oyed as a bo ard m em

be r or a co ns ul ta nt

or a vo lu nt eer or ai d or as si st an t or in an y ot he r cap aci ty as so ci at ed wit h
th e ch ur ch th at ha s be en th e su bjec t of di sc us si on he re th at wou ld al lo w hi m in an y way , sh ap e, m an ne r, or fo rm acce ss to or in vo lv em en t in an y type o f fi na nc ia l ac ti vi ty.

Id

. at 16

. F u r t h e r , th e co ur t ba rred Hen de rs on fro m “ crea t[i ng ], op erat [in g],

m an ag [in g], or pa rti ci pa t[i ng ] in th e c r eat io n, op erat io n, or m an ag em en t of an y
bu si ne ss en ti ty, in cl ud in g a fam il y bu si ne ss , wit ho ut th e writ te n pe rm is si on o f t h e

Pro ba ti on Offi ce.” Id

. a t 1 9

. The se pr oh ib it io ns su bs eq ue nt ly be cam e sp eci al

co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e 8 an d 9, res pe ct iv el y

. Se e Am

. J. at 4, Uni te d St at es

v. Hen de rs on , No. 4 :1 4- cr-0 02 07 -HEA (E.D. Mo. Feb . 17 , 20 15 ), ECF No. 6 5.

In im po si ng th e sp eci al co nd it io ns , th e co ur t care fu ll y ex pl ai ne d to Hen de rs on

th at he was to ha ve no pa rt in th e fin an ci al m at te rs of an y or ga ni zat io n, in cl ud in g hi s
ch ur ch

. The co ur t no te d th at “ [e]ver y bo dy ha s t h [ e] rig ht to pa rti ci pa te in th ei r
ch ur ch

, to ex pr es s th ei r be li ef, [an d] to pr oc eed wit h an ex pr es si on of th ei r rel ig io n.”

Sen te nc in g H r ’g Tr. at 24

. Acco rd in g to th e co ur t, Hen de rs on m ay pa rti ci pa te in

ch ur ch act iv it ie s ; h e s i mply m ay no t “ do an y th in g th at ha s to do wit h m on ey in th e
ch ur ch .” Id

. at 18

. Hen de rs on as su re d t h e d is tri ct co ur t th at he un de rs to od th e

res tri ct io ns . The co ur t s en te nc ed Hend ers on to 27 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, fo ll owe d
by th ree y ears of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. The se nt en ce was at t h e to p of th e cal cu la te d

Gui de li ne s ra ng e.

B. Revo ca ti on Pro ceed in gs

Hen de rs on ’s in carc erat io n en de d in Mar ch 20 17

, an d hi s th ree- y ear su pe rv is ed

rel eas e co m

m en ced

. In May 20 17

, th e pr ob at io n of fic e su sp ect ed th at Hen de rs on ha d

vi ol at ed hi s pr ob at io n co nd it io ns , ag ai n whi le li vi ng at a Bu reau of Pri so ns ha lfwa y
ho us e. The go ve rn m en t in it ia te d an in ve st ig at io n, whi ch rev eal ed th at Hen de r s on ,

-5

-un de r th e na m e Bi sh op Larry Hen de rs o n

- B e y, ha d be gu n ad m in is te rin g a pu bl ic

Fa ce book pa ge en ti tl ed “ The Nati on al Ass em bl y of Ch ur ch es .” G ove rn m en t’ s Mot ion

to Rev ok e Def.’s Su pe rv is ed Rel eas e at 2, Uni te d St at es v. Hen de rs on , No. 4: 14 -cr00 20 7- HEA (E.D. Mo . M ay 3, 20 17 ), ECF No. 73 Th e p a g e ’s c ov er ph ot o sh owe d

an im ag e of Hen de rs on at a de sk in an off ic e se tt in g, su pe rimpos ed by a lo go of th e

or ga ni zat io n. The co ve r al so in cl ud ed th e co at of arm s of th e Bi sh op of th e Nati on al

Ass em bl y of Ch ur ch es

. Hen de rs on f req ue nt ly up da te d th e Face bo ok pa ge an d

in fo rm ed vi si to rs tha t he al so m anag ed “ The Dan ie l Mat th ews Eccl es ia st ic al Co ll eg e”
(“ Dan ie l Mat th ews ”). The co ll eg e pr oc la im ed it se lf t o b e th e “ la rg es t eccl es ia st ic al

c o l l e g e pr ov id in g m ark et ab le /o ccu pa ti on al st ud ie s to lo cal ch ur ch es an d ex

of fen de rs ,” whi ch ha d be en in op erat io n fo r m or e th an 24 y ears

. Id

. at 3. Dan ie l

Mat th ews ’s Face bo ok pa ge id en ti fie d Hen de rs on ’s so n, Dan ie l L. M. Hen de rs on , as

th e “ Ch ai r of

[th e] Boar d o f In co rp or at or s.” Id

.

Hen de rs on po st ed m

ul ti pl e ad ve rti se m en ts fo r Dan ie l Mat th ews , in cl ud in g job

of fers an d fr ee or redu ced tu it io n offe rs

. Hen de rs on ’s Face bo ok pa ge al so pro vi de d

en ro ll m en t in fo rm at io n fo r Dan ie l Mat th ews an d pr ov id ed a Paypal hyperl in k whe re

pr os p e ct iv e st ud en ts co ul d pa y th ei r ap pl ic at io n fees

. Hen de rs on po st ed ph ot os of

pu rp or te d si te s fo r th e co ll eg e’s St

. Lou is he ad qu art ers , cred it un io n, an d ad m is si on s

of fic e. So m e po st s pr ov id ed a ph on e nu m be r fo r th e co ll eg e; th e nu m be r was

Hen de rs on ’s per so na l ce ll ph on e n um be r.

The go ve rn m en t’s in ve st ig at io n ex po se d th e en ti re Dan ie l Mat th ews op erat io n

as frau du le nt

. All eg in g th at H e nd ers on vi ol at ed sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 an d 9, th e

go ve rn m en t fil ed a m ot io n to rev ok e Hen de rs on ’s su pe rv is ed rel eas e. One week aft er

it s fir st m ot io n, th e go ve rn m en t fil e d a s u p p le m en ta l m ot io n to rev ok e aft er

in te rv ie win g two in di vi du al s. One pe rs on was hi red by Dan ie l Mat th ews to pe rfo rm

m ai nt en an ce. Hen de rs on in te ract ed wit h th is in di vi du al on be ha lf of th e co ll eg e. Thi s

pe rs on to ld go ve rn m en t in ve st ig at or s th at al l of hi s pa y ch eck s fro m Dan ie l Mat th ews

were ret ur ne d be cau se of in su ffi c i e n t fu nd s. The se co nd pe rs on th e go ve rn m en t

-6

-inv es tig at or s int ervi ewed id en ti fie d he rs el f as a st ud en t reg is tra nt at Dan ie l Ma tth ew s.

Sh e, to o, co m

m un ic at ed wit h Hen de rs on who cl ai m ed to rep res en t th e co ll eg e. Afte r
le arn in g th at al l Dan ie l Mat th ews of fic es ha d be en cl os ed an d th e sc he du le d st ud en t

or ie nt at io n can cel ed

, sh e cal le d Hen de rs on to co m pl ai n. Hen de rs on th en as su red he r

th at th e or ie nt at io n ha d be en res ch ed ul ed ; h e al so of fere d he r a job at Dan ie l

Mat th ews

.

App ro xi m at el y on e m on th aft er th e go ve rn m en t’s su pp le m en ta l m ot io n to

rev ok e, th e pr ob at io n of

fic e pe ti ti on ed th e co ur t to is su e a warr an t fo r Hen de rs on ’s

arre st

, al le gi ng th at Hen de rs on vi ol a t e d t wo st an da rd co nd it io ns an d sp eci al

co nd it io ns 7 an d 9 of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. In it s pe ti ti on , th e pr ob at io n of fic e no te d th at

du rin g ev ery te le ph on e an d face -to -fac e co nt act wit h Hen de rs on , he as su red th e

pr ob at io n of

fic er th at he was no t op erat i n g o r man ag in g a bu si ne ss

. The pr ob at io n

of fic e ex pr es sl y st at ed th at it s pe ti ti on was su bm it te d as a su pp le m en t to th e

go ve rn m en t’s m ot io ns

. Hen de rs on su bs eq ue nt ly was arre st ed an d re le as ed on hi s own

reco gn iz an ce. Bet ween th e o r ig in al m ot io n to rev ok e an d th e two su bs eq ue nt

su pp le m en ta l m ot io ns , th e go ve rn m en t an d th e pr ob at io n of fic e to ge th er al le ge d th at

Hen de rs on vi ol at ed two st an da rd co nd it io ns as well as sp eci al s con di ti on s 7, 8, and

9.

At th e rev oc at io n he ari ng , Hen de rs on ’s co un s e l s t a te d to th e co ur t th at

He n d ers on wan te d to waiv e th e he ari ng fo r th e two Grad e C vi ol at io ns 3

co rres po nd in g to sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 an d 9. Hen de rs on th en as ke d th e co ur t to pe rm it

hi m to co nt in ue hi s su pe rv is ed rel eas e, or in th e al te rn at iv e, to be se nt en ced to ho m e

co nf in em en t. Th e go ve rn m en t ob jecte d, no ti ng th at in an effo rt to rem ai n on

su pe rv is ed rel eas e, Hen de rs on pr oc ur e d a f o rg ed le tt er on Dan ie l Mat th ews

A Grad e C vi ol at io n is “ co nd uc t co ns ti tu ti ng (A) a fed era l

, st at e, or lo cal 3

of fen se pu ni sh ab le by a te rm of im pr is on m en t of on e y ear or le ss ; or (B) a vi ol at io n of an y ot he r co nd it io n o f su pe rv is io n.” U.S.S.G. § 7 B1 .1(a )(3 ).

-7

-le tt erh ead

, pu rp or te dl y fro m th e de an an d ge ne ral bo ard m em be r o f t h e co ll eg e,

as ki ng th e co ur t no t to se nd Hen de rs on ba ck to pr is on

. The go ve rn m en t al so po in te d

ou t th at Hen de rs on li ed to th e co ur t, cl ai m in g h e h ad di ab et es an d a he art co nd it io n

th at req ui red su rg er

y

. T he gove rn m ent co nc lu de d th at Hen de rs on ’s “ pr ob at io n sh ou ld

be rev ok ed or h is su pe rv is ed rel eas e sh ou ld be rev ok ed ; t ha t h e sh ou ld be co nf in ed

be cau se , qu it e fran kl y , he is n’t go in g to st op un le ss he is co nf in ed

. And we ha ve se en

th at ti m e an d ti m e ag ai n.” Su pe rv is ed Rel eas e Rev oc at io n Hr’g Tr. at 19

, Uni te d

S t a t e s v. Hen de rs on , No. 4: 14 -cr- 00 20 7- HEA (E.D. Mo

. Ju ly 20

, 20 17 ), ECF No

. 11 8.

The di st ri c t c ou rt, aft er pl aci ng Hen de rs on un de r oa th

, co nf irmed th at

Hen de rs on ad m it te d th e two Grad e C vi ol at io ns an d waiv ed th e he ari ng

. The co ur t

ad vi se d Hen de rs on of th e co ns eq u e n c e s o f hi s ad m is si on an d waiv er. It th en

rem in de d Hen de rs on of i t s e f f o r t to en su re th at Hen de rs on un de rs to od fu ll y th e

sp eci al co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e at th e or ig in al se nt en ci ng

. The di st ric t co ur t

th en se nt en ced Hen de rs on to 12 m on th s an d 1 da y in th e Bu reau of Pri so ns , fo ll owe d

b y 1 8 m on th s of su pe rv is ed rel eas e, fo r vi ol at in g sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 an d 9. Th e

co ur t al so im

po se d th e sa m e co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e im po se d at Hen de rs on ’s

or ig in al se nt en ci ng , in cl ud in g th e sp eci al co nd it io ns. T he w ri tten jud gm en t, ho wev er,

st at ed th at Hen de rs on vi ol at ed st an da rd co nd it io ns 2 and 3 and sp eci al co nd it io ns 7

an d 9. Se e J. at 1– 2, Uni te d St at es v. Hen de rs on , No. 4: 14 -cr- 00 20 7- HEA (E.D. Mo

. Ju ly 20, 2 01 7) , ECF No. 1 08

.

II. Dis cu ss io n

Hen de rs on no w ch al l e n g e s hi s rev oc at io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e, cl ai m in g

in su ffi ci en cy of th e ev id en ce. He al so arg ue s th at th e su pe rv is ed rel eas e sp e c i al

co nd it io ns sh ou ld be rem ov ed . W e d is ag ree a nd affi rm

.

-8

-A. Su ff ic ie nc y o f t he Evid en ce t o Rev ok

e S up er vi se d Rel ea se

Hen de rs on cl ai m s th e di st ric t co ur t l a ck ed su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to rev ok e hi s

su pe rv is ed rel eas e. The writ te n jud gm en t refl ect ed th at Hen de rs on vi ol at ed st an da rd

co nd it io ns 2 an d 3 an d sp eci al co nd it io ns 7 an d 9. Hen de rs on arg ue s th at he di d no t

ad m it to vi ol at in g th e st an da rd co nd it io ns or to vi ol at in g sp eci al co nd it io n 7. Fu rth er,
he as se rts th at th e go ve rn m en t pr es en te d no ev id en ce fo r th os e vi ol at io ns

. Hen de rs on

al so co nt en d s th at th e pr ob at io n of fic e’s pe ti ti on to rev ok e su pe rs ed es th e

go ve rn m en t’s t wo p rio r m ot io ns to rev ok e.

Usu al ly, “ [t]he co ur t’s

. . . fact fin di ng as to whe th er or no t a vi ol at io n oc cu rred

is rev ie wed fo r cl ear erro r.” Uni te d St at es v. Boy d

, 79 2 F.3 d 91 6, 91 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 )
(q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Ca ro th er s , 33 7 F.3 d 10 17

, 10 19 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 )). Bu t whe n

an ap pe ll an t fai ls to rai se hi s ob jecti on s be fo re th e di st ric t co ur t, we rev ie w fo r pl ai n

erro r. Uni te d St at es v. Ta

yl or , 74 7 F.3 d 51 6, 51 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ) (ci ti ng Uni te d St at es

v. Ta yl or , 67 9 F.3 d 10 05

, 10 07 (8 th Ci r

. 2 0 12 )). A si ng le vi ol at io n ba se d on a

pr ep on de ran c e of th e ev id en ce is su ffi ci en t fo r rev oc at io n. Uni te d St at es v. Mil le r , 55 7 F .3d 91 0, 9 14 (8t h C ir. 2 00 9) (ci ti ng 18 U.S.C. § 3 58 3( e)(3 )).

W e wil l rev ers e fo r cl ear erro r “ 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.” 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 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Bah en a , 22 3 F.3d 79 7, 80 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 00 )). In

c o n t r a st

, we wil l rev ers e fo r pl ai n erro r on ly whe n we fin d an “ (1 ) erro r, (2 ) th at i s pl ai n, an d ( 3 ) th at affe ct s su bs ta nt ia l rig ht s. If al l th ree co nd it io ns are m et

, an

ap pe ll at e co ur t m ay th en ex erci se it s di sc ret io n to no ti ce a fo rfei te d erro r, bu t on ly if
(4 ) th e erro r se rio us ly aff ect s th e fai rn es s, in te gr it y , o r pu bl ic rep ut at i o n o f jud ic ia l

pr oc eed in g s

. ” U

ni te d St at es v. Pir an i

, 40 6 F.3 d 54 3, 55 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (en ba nc )
(q uo ti ng Jo hn so n v . Un it ed St at es , 5 20 U.S. 4 61 , 4 66 –6 7 (1 99 7) ). The go ve rn m en t

as se rts th at be cau se Hen de rs on fai le d to rai se ob jecti on s be fo re th e di st ric t co ur t, pl ai n erro r rev ie w is ap pr op ria te

. Hen de rs on , to th e co nt rary, arg ue s th at ou r rev ie w

on th is is su e sh ou ld be fo r cl ear erro r, si nc e he ha d no op po rtu n i t y t o o bjec t to th e

-9

-di st ric t co ur t’s writ te n jud gm en t. W e co nc lu de th at H en de rs on’ s suf fi ci en cy ar gum ent

fai ls un de r ei th er st an da rd of rev ie w. The di st ric t co ur t ha d un di sp ut ed ev id en ce th at

Hen de rs on vi ol at ed th e co nd it io ns of h is su pe rv is ed rel eas e.

Fi rs t, we no te th at th e p ro ba ti on off ic e’s pe ti ti on to rev ok e d id no t s up ers ed e

th e go ve rn m en t’s two pr io r m ot io ns

. Rat he r, th e pe ti ti on ex p r e s s l y st at ed th at it

su pp le m en te d th e two pr ev io us m ot io ns by th e go ve rn m en t. Se e Pet

. fo r W arra nt or

Su m m on s fo r Offen de r Und er Su pe rv is io n at 4, Unit ed Sta te s v. Hen de rs on , No. 4: 14

- cr-0 02 07 -HEA (E.D. Mo

. Ju ne 12

, 20 17 ), ECF No. 90 (“ Thi s pe ti ti on is su bm it te d as

a su pp le m en t to th e Gov ern m en t’s Mo ti on s. ” )

. Th us , b et ween th e two m ot io ns an d

th e pe ti ti on , th e go ve rn m en t al le ge d th at Hen de rs on vi ol at ed two st an da rd co nd it io ns

an d sp eci al co nd it io ns 7, 8, an d 9. At th e rev oc at io n pr oc eed in g, Hen de rs on waiv ed

th e he ari ng an d ad m it te d to vi ol at in g sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 an d 9, an d th e di st ric t co ur t

rev ok ed Hen de rs on ’s su pe rv is ed rel eas e ba se d on th os e two vi ol at io ns

. The writ te n jud gm en t in co rrec tl y refl ect ed th at Hen de rs on vi ol at ed two st an da rd co nd it io ns an d

sp eci al co nd it io n 7; it co rrec tl y no te d th at Hen de rs on vi ol at ed sp eci al co nd it io n 9 bu t

om it te d Hen de rs on ’s vi ol at io n o f sp eci al co nd it io n 8

.

“ W he n a di st ric t co ur t’s or al se nt en ce co nf li ct s wit h th e writ te n jud gm en t, ‘the

or al se nt en ce co nt ro ls .’ ” Uni te d St at es v. Si lv a , 86 5 F.3 d 10 27

, 10 29 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 )
(p er cu ria m ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Fos te r , 51 4 F.3 d 8 2 1, 82 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 )).

Fu rth er, “ [t]he Su pr em e Co ur t or an y ot he r co ur t of ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on m ay affi rm ,

m od ify, va cat e, se t as id e or rev ers e an y jud gm en t, de cree , or or de r of a co ur t la wfu ll y
br ou gh t be fo re it fo r rev ie w.” 28 U.S.C. § 21 06

. A rem an d to th e di st ric t co ur t is

un ne ces sa ry whe n we can “ co rrec t th e erro r ou rs el ve s.” Uni te d St at es v. Ano ba h

, 73 4

F.3 d 73 3, 73 9 (7 th Ci r. 20 13 ); se e al so Uni te d St at es v. No bl e , 17 9 F. App ’x 40 0, 40 1
(8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (p er cu ria m ) (m od ifyin g writ te n jud gm en t wit ho ut rema n d )

. H e re,
be cau se Hen de rs on ad m it te d to vi ol at in g sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 an d 9 of hi s su pe rv is ed

rel eas e, th e di st ric t co ur t ha d am pl e ev id en ce to rev ok e. No rem an d is ne ces sa ry , an d

-1 0-we m od ify th e jud gm en t to refl ect th at Hen de rs on vi ol at ed sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 and

9 o f hi s s up erv is ed rel eas e.

B. Imp os it io n o

f t he Sp eci al

Co nd it io ns

Hen de rs on fo r th e fir st ti m e on ap pe al ch al l e n g e s th e im po si ti on of th e two

sp eci al c o nd it io ns , co nt en di ng th ey (1 ) are no t reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e 18 U.S.C.
§ 35 83 (d ) se nt en ci ng fact or s; (2 ) in vo lv e a g r e a te r de pr iv at io n of li be rty th an

reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry ; an d (3 ) are in co ns is te nt wit h th e pe rti ne nt po li cy st at em en ts

fro m th e Sen te nc in g Co m m is si on

. Bec au se Hen de rs on fai le d to ob ject to th e sp eci al

co nd it io ns to t h e di st ric t co ur t, we rev ie w fo r pl ai n erro r. Se e Uni te d St at es v.

Ca rl so n , 40 6 F.3 d 52 9, 53 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (“ W he n a de fen da nt fai ls to ob ject to th e

sp eci al co nd it io n a t s en te nc in g, . . . we rev ie w for pl ai n e rro r.” (ci ta ti on om it te d) ).

1. Rea so na bl

y Rel at ed to § 3 58 3(

d) Se nt en ci ng

Fact or s

Hen de rs on arg ue s th at th e sp eci al co nd it io ns are no t reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e

se nt en ci ng fact or s. Howev er, on th is is su e, Hen de rs on fo cu se s on ly o n th e co ur t’s

res tri ct io n on hi s in vo lv em en t wit h ch ur ch fin an ces. Se e App el la nt ’s Br. at 30 –3 1. W e

th eref or e li m it ou r in qu iry to th at sp eci al co nd it io n. Se e Ch ay -Vel as qu ez v. Ash cr of t

, 36 7 F.3 d 75 1, 75 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ) (“ Si nc e th ere was no m ean in gf ul arg um en t on th is

cl ai m in hi s o pe ni ng bri ef, i t i s wai ve d.” )

Pu rs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 3 58 3( d)

, [a] di st ric t cou rt has br oa d d is cret io n
to im po se sp eci al co nd it io ns of su p e r v i s ed rel eas e. Und er § 35 83 (d ),

sp eci al co nd it io ns m

us t be reas on ab ly rel at ed to fo ur fact or s: th e na tu re

an d c irc um st an ces of th e of fen se an d th e hi st or y an d c ha ract eri st ic s o f
th e de fen da nt

, th e ne ed to af f o r d a de qu at e de te rren ce to cri m in al

co nd uc t, th e ne ed to pr ot ect th e pu b l i c f r o m fu tu re cri m es of th e de fen da nt

, an d th e ne ed t o pr ov id e th e de fen da nt wit h ne ed ed
ed uc at io na l or vo cat io na l tra in in g, m ed ic al care , or o t h e r co rrec ti on al

tre at m en t in th e m os t effect iv e m an ne r. The sp eci al co nd it io n ne ed no t be rel at ed to al l fo ur fact or s; in s te ad

, th e fact or s are weig he d
in de pe nd en tl y

.

-1 1-Uni te d St at es v. Moo re , 86 0 F.3d 10 76

, 10 78 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ) (al te rat io n in or ig in al )

(ci ta ti on s an d in te rn al qu ot at io ns om it te d)

. Hen de rs on arg ue s th at th e sp eci al

co nd it io n is no t reas on ab ly rel at ed to t he se nt en ci ng fact or s be cau se “ th e on ly

i n v o l v e ment of Hen de rs on ’s ch ur ch was as th e pa y ee of a cas hi er’s ch eck in th e

am ou nt of $2 ,00 0 th at Hen de rs on ha d se c u r e d a f t e r ha vi ng al read y pe rp et rat ed th e
lo an frau d u po n M is so ur i Titl e.” Appe ll an t’s Br. at 30

. He li ke ns hi s case to Uni te d

St at es v. W

it ti g , 52 8 F .3d 12 80 (10 th Cir . 20 08 ).

As a cas e fro m a si st er ci rcu it

, W it ti g is no t bi nd in g on th is co ur t. W it ti g is al so
read il y di st in g u i s h a b l e. In W it ti g , th e di st ric t co ur t ba rred th e de fen da nt fro m

em pl oym en t “ in an y cap aci ty i n whi ch he wil l ha ve ex ecu ti ve au th or it y ov er an y
bu si ne ss , co m

pa ny or ag en cy , an d sh a l l n o t e n ga ge in an y fin an ci al ag reem en ts or

ne go ti at io ns in vo lv in g an y bu si ne ss , co m pa ny or ag en cy wit ho ut th e pr io r ap pr ov al

of th e Co ur t.” Id

. at 12 84 (ci ta ti on om it te d) . Th e Ten th Ci rcu it rev ers ed th e di st ric t

co ur t, fin di ng no rel at io ns hi p be twee n t h e d e f en da nt ’s cri m in al co nd uc t an d hi s

po si ti on as an ex ecu ti ve ; th e co ur t co nc lu de d th at “ [t]he of fen se of co nv ic ti on was
ba se d on [th e de fen da nt ’s] pe rs on al co nd uc t, no t hi s co nd uc t as an ex ecu ti ve

. . . . The

m ere fact [th e de fen da nt ] en ga ge d in [th e cri m in al ] co nd uc t whi le em pl oyed as an

ex ecu ti ve do es no t es ta bl is h th e ne ces sa ry co nn ect io n be t w e e n t he co nd uc t an d hi s

m an ag em en t/ ex ecu ti ve po si ti on s.” Id

. at 1 28 8.

The W it ti g de f en da nt ’s cri m in al co nd uc t— frau du le nt co nc eal m en t of a

pe rs on al lo an —was un rel at ed to hi s po si ti on as an ex ecu ti ve

. Hen de rs on , on th e ot he r

ha nd

, in te rtwi ne d hi s c h u r c h act iv it ie s wit h hi s frau du le nt de al in gs

. Hen de rs on ’s

res tri ct io n is in li ne wit h pr io r cas es whe re we ha ve up he ld th e em pl oym en t

pr oh ib it io ns

. Se e , e

. g

. , Ca rl so n , 40 6 F.3 d at 53 2 (aff irming sp eci al co nd it io n

pr oh ib it in g de fen da nt fro m wor ki ng in th e m ed ic a l f i el d, be cau se he “ frau du le nt ly

ob ta in ed pr es cri pt io n m ed ic at io n hu nd red s of ti m es ov er th e co ur se of se ve ral y ears

. His oc cu pa ti on as an or th op ed ic ph y si ci an ’s as si st an t pl aced hi m in cl os e pr ox im it y

-1 2-to pr es cri pt io n m ed ic at io n, an d he us ed sa m pl e med i c a t io ns ob ta in ed th ro ug h hi s

em pl oym en t on at le as t two pr ev io us oc cas io ns ” (ci ta ti on om it te d) ); Uni te d St at es v.
Ch oa te

, 10 1 F.3 d 56 2, 56 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 96 ) (aff irming s e l f-em

pl oym en t res tri ct io n
whe re “ [t]he di st ric t co ur t ha d be fo re it ev id en ce of th ree se pa rat e bu si ne ss es [th e
de fen da nt ] op erat ed th at a l l e n d e d up pe rp et ua ti ng th e sa m e cy cl e of frau d. One of

th es e b us in es se s s ta rte d u p a fte r [t he de fen da nt ] was in di ct ed ”).

W e ho ld th at th e sp eci al co nd it io n ba rri ng Hen de rs on fro m pa rti ci pa ti ng in an y

or ga ni zat io na l fin an ci al act iv it ie s du rin g hi s su pe rv is ed rel eas e is reas on ab ly rel at ed

to th e § 35 83 (d ) se nt en ci ng fact or s, an d we f in d n o e rro r.

2. Gre at er

Depr iv at io n o

f Li be rt y th an is Nece ss ar

y

Hen de rs on ne xt co nt en ds th at ev en if th e two sp eci al co nd it io ns are reas on ab ly

rel at ed to th e se nt en ci ng fact or s, th e res tri ct io ns de pr iv e Hen de rs on of hi s li be rty

m or e th an is ne ces sa ry

. He arg ue s th at ne it he r res tr i c t i o n p ro vi de s ex cep ti on s, an d

th ey are, t he refo re, o ve rb ro ad . Fur th er, Hen de rs on su gg es ts th at th e ch ur ch fin an ce

pr oh ib it io n in fri ng es hi s Fi rs t Am en dm en t rig ht s, as th e res tr i c ti on “ wou ld ba r hi m

f r o m d o na ti ng m on ey to th e ch ur ch be cau se su ch do na ti on wou ld be a type o f

fin an ci al act iv it y .” App el la nt ’s Br. at 36

. The co nd it io ns are ne it he r ov erb ro ad no r do

th ey pro hi bi t h im

fro m co nt rib ut in g fi na nc ia ll y

to rel ig io us org an iz at io ns

.

Hen de rs on rel ie s on Uni te d St at es v. W es t , 8 29 F.3 d 10 13 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ), to

su p p or t hi s arg um en t th at th e co nd it io ns are ov erb ro ad

. In W es t

, th e de fen da nt

be li ev ed he was no t req ui red to pa y fed eral i n c o me t a x es ; he wro te an e-b oo k an d

m an ag ed

, own ed

, pa rti ci pa te d in

, or co nt rib ut ed to va rio us web si te s reg ard in g hi s ta x

av oi da nc e sc he m es

. Id

. at 10 16

. Su bs eq ue nt to th e de fen da nt ’s co n v i c t i o n fo r ta x

ev as io n, th e di st ric t co ur t ba rred th e de fen da nt fro m crea ti ng , es ta bl is hi ng , o r

m ai nt ai ni ng an y web si te s; th e co ur t al so pr oh ib it ed th e de fen da nt fro m th e us e of an y

co m pu te rs wit ho ut th e pr io r writ te n ap pr ov al of a pr ob at io n of fic er. Id

. at 10 17

. W e

rev ers ed

, no ti ng th at “ [a]lt ho ug h [t he de fen da nt ] m is us ed hi s ac ces s t o th e In te rn et

,

-1 3-web si te s pr es en t an im po rta nt m od e of co m

m un ic at iv e an d co m

m erci al in te rco ur se

in ou r so ci et y th ro ug h whi ch [th e de fen da nt ] can ex erci se hi s ri gh t to sp eak .” Id

. at

10 21 . Fur th er, we em

ph as iz ed th at be cau se “ [t]hi s co ur t i s ‘par ti cu la rly relu ct an t t o

up ho ld swe ep in g res tri ct io ns on im po rta nt co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s,’

. . . su ch [ab so lu te ]

ba ns are di sf

av or ed .” Id

. (al te rat io ns an d el li ps is in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es

v. Ben de r , 56 6 F .3d 74 8, 7 53 (8t h C ir. 2 00 9) ).

Hen de rs on face s no ab so lu te or swe ep i n g res tri ct io ns on im po rta nt

co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s. In im po si ng th e res tri ct io n on pa rti ci pa ti on in ch ur ch fin an ces , th e di st ric t cou rt caref

ul ly ex pl ai ne d t o Hen de rs on —b ot h a t t he or ig in al se nt en ci ng

an d at th e rev oc a t i o n h e a rin g— th at Hen de rs on ’s pa rti ci pa ti on in hi s ch ur ch is

na rro wly li m it ed to pr oh ib it in g hi s ha nd li ng of ch ur ch fi na nc es

. Giv in g m on ey to th e
ch ur ch is no t pr oh ib it ed

. Se e Uni te d St at e s v

. M ef fo rd

, 71 1 F.3 d 92 3, 92 7 (8 th Ci r.

20 13 ) (“ W e wil l on ly st rik e do wn a co nd it io n of su pe rv is ed rel eas e as

un co ns ti tu ti on al ly ov erb ro ad ‘ if i ts ov erb read th is real an d su bs ta nt ia l in rel at io n to

it s pl ai nl y le gi ti m at e swe ep .’ ” (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Th omp so n , 65 3 F.3 d 68 8, 69 5
(8 th Ci r. 20 11 ))). W e no te al so th at Hen de rs on hi m se lf pr op os ed th is sp eci al

co nd it io n t o t he di st ric t co ur t.

3. Co ns is te nc e wi th Pert in en t Po li cy S ta te men ts

Alt ho ug h Hen de rs on rai se s th e co nt en ti on th at th e s p eci al co nd it io ns are

in co ns is te nt wit h pe rti ne nt Sen te nc in g Co m m is si on po li cy st at em en ts

, he pr es en ts no
di sc us si on as to ho w th e co nd it io ns are in co ns is te nt wit h an y po li cy st at em en ts

. W e

co ns id er t he cla im

waiv ed for lac k o f a m ean in gf ul arg um en t. Se e Ch ay -Vel as qu ez , 36 7 F .3d at 7 56

.

-1 4-III. Co nc lu si on

W e affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t, bu t we m od ify Hen de rs on ’s rev oc at io n jud gm en t

to refl ect accu rat el y th at he vi ol at ed on ly sp eci al co nd it io ns 8 an d 9 of hi s su pe rv is ed

rel eas e.

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

-1 5-