## 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- 27 21

__ __ __ __ __ _

*
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

* Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e

v. * Dis tri ct of Ne br as ka

. *
Mi ch ael Karas

, * [UNPUBLISHED]

* App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _

Su bm it te d: May 14 , 20 12
Fi le d: Ju ne 1, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _

Befo re MUR PHY, BENTON, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _

PER CURI AM.

Mi ch ael Karas 's su pe rv is ed rel eas e wa s r e v o k ed by t he di st ric t co ur t an d he 1

was se nt en ced to on e y ear an d on e da y i n pr is on aft er he ad m it te d to vi ol at in g hi s

co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e by us in g m et ha m ph et am in e an d fail in g t o s ho w up
fo r req ui red dr ug te st in g. Karas ap pe al s, arg ui ng th at th e di st ric t c o u r t f a i l e d to

co ns id er th e se nt en ci ng fact or s un de r 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) an d im po se d an ex ces si ve

se nt en ce. We affir m

.

The Hon or ab le Jo se ph F. Bat ai ll on , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1

Dis tri ct of Ne br as ka

.Karas ha d pl ed gu il ty in 20 03 to co ns pi racy to di st rib ut e m or e th an 50 0 gr am s

of m et ha m

ph et am in e an d po ss es si on of a fir earm du rin g a dr ug tra ffi ck in g of fen se in

vi ol at io n of 21 U.S.C

. § 8 4 6 a nd 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( c). He was se nt en ced to 18 0

m on th s in pr is on , bu t th at was la te r red uc ed to 90 m on t h s o n a moti on by th e

go ve rn m en t. He was al so se nt en ced to fiv e y ears of su pe rv is ed rel eas e f o r each

of fense, to ru n co nc ur ren tl y

. Two m an da to ry co nd it io ns of Karas 's su pe rv is ed rel eas e

were th at he refr ai n fro m us in g co nt ro ll ed su bs ta nc es a n d th at he su bm it to dr ug

te st in g.

Karas be ga n h i s t e r m of su pe rv is ed rel eas e on Ju ly 20

, 20 09

. In Nov em be r
20 10 hi s pro ba ti on of

fic er file d a pe ti ti on fo r a warra nt or su m m on s be cau se he ha d

al le ge dl y fai le d to no ti fy th e of fic er ab ou t a ch an ge in hi s ad dr es s, ha d us ed

m et ha m ph et am in e, an d ha d fai le d to at te nd sc he du le d dr ug te st s. At a he ari ng in

fro nt of th e di st ric t co ur t, Karas ad m it te d to us in g m et ha m ph et am in e an d to m is si ng
th e sc he du le d dr

ug te st s. The di st ric t co ur t po st po ne d se nt en ci ng an d rel eas ed Karas

so he co ul d re cei ve tre at m en t at a ha lfwa y ho us e.

In Feb ru ary 20 11 th e pr ob at io n of fic er fil ed a se co nd pe ti ti on fo r a warra nt or

su m m on s be cau se Karas ha d al le ge dl y le ft th e reh ab il it at io n cen te r wit ho ut

pe rm is si on , co m

m it te d a bu rg la ry , an d fai le d to at te nd sc he du le d dr ug te st in g. Afte r

rece iv in g a se nt en ce of 7 to 10 y ears in st at e co ur t fo r fel on y ch arg es , Karas ap pe ared

be fo re th e fed eral di st ric t co ur t fo r se nt en ci ng

. The go ve rn m en t wit hd rew it s se co nd

pe ti ti on ag ai ns t Karas, and in st ead as ke d th e di st ric t co ur t to se nt en ce hi m ba se d on
hi s pr io r ad m is si on s th at he ha d vi ol at ed th e te rm s of hi s su pe rv is ed rel eas e by us in g

m et ha m ph et am in e an d m is si ng sc he du le d dr ug te st s. The ad

jus te d re p or t an d

reco m m en da ti on st at e d th at th e ad vi so ry gu id el in e ran ge fo r Tay lo r's ad m it te d

vi ol at io ns was 6 to 12 m on th s i n p ris on . U.S.S.G. §§ 7 B1 .4(a ), 7B 1.1 (b ).

Karas req ue st ed a se nt en ce at th e lo w end of t he gu id el in e ran ge wit ho ut an y

su pe rv is ed rel eas e be cau se he ha d be en di ag no se d wit h bi po la r di se a s e a n d h e ha d

al read y rece iv ed a su bs ta nt ia l se nt en ce in st at e pr is on

. The go ve rn m en t ag reed wit h

-2

-a reco m

m en da ti on by th e pr ob at io n of fic er th at Tay lo r be se nt en ced to 24 m on th s in

pr is on an d fu rth er st at ed th at it di d no t be li ev e th at an y ad di ti on al su pe rv is io n wou ld

be us efu l. The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at a pr is on sen te nc e was ne ces sa ry si nc e

Karas ha d ab sc on de d an d co m m it te d a cri m e a f

t e r h e h a d earl ie r be en pe rm it te d to

li ve in a ha lfwa y ho us e. Karas was se nt e n c e d t o o n e y ear an d on e da y , to ru n

co ns ecu ti ve ly to h is st at e se nt en ce. No s up erv is ed rel eas e was ord ered

.

Karas ap pe al s, arg ui ng th at th e di st ric t co ur t fai le d to co ns id er th e se nt en ci ng
fact or s un de r § 35 53 (a) an d im po se d an ex ces si ve se nt en ce. He c o n t e n d s t ha t hi s

se nt en ce was un reas on ab le be cau se hi s vi ol at io ns were no t th e m os t se rio us types of

of fen se s li st ed un de r Ch a p te r 7 of th e se nt en ci ng gu id el in es

. See U.S.S.G. §

7B 1.1 (a). W e rev ie w a rev oc at io n se nt en ce fo r pr oc ed ur al so un dn es s an d we rev ie w
it s su bs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss un de r "t he 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. Ben to n, 62 7 F.3 d 10 51

, 10 55 (8 th

Ci r. 20 10 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d S ta te s v

. Mer riv al

, 52 1 F .3d 88 9, 8 90 (8t h C ir. 2 00 8) ).

Si nc e Karas di d no t ob

ject to th e ad eq ua cy of th e di st ric t co ur t's co ns id erat io n

o f th e § 35 53 (a) fact or s at hi s se nt en ci ng he ari ng , ou r rev ie w is fo r pl ai n erro r

. Ben to n, 62 7 F.3 d at 10 55

. The di st ric t co ur t di d no t err in im po si ng a se nt en ce of on e

y ear an d on e da y be cau se it refl ec t e d a n un de rs ta nd in g of th e na tu re an d

ci rcu m st an ces of Ka ras 's v io la ti on s, h is hi st or y , and th e se rio us ne ss of h is off en se

. See Uni te d St at es v. Pet rei ki s, 55 1 F.3 d 82 2, 82 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). The di st ric t co ur t

li st en ed to Karas 's co un se l di sc us s hi s m en ta l il ln es s an d st at e co ur t se nt en ce. It th en

ex pr es se d co nc ern th at Karas ha d ab sc on de d an d co m m it te d a cri m e aft er th e co ur t

ha d p os tp on ed hi s i ni ti al sen te nc in g s o t ha t he co ul d re cei ve tre at m en t at a ha lfwa y
h ou se

. W hi le th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t sp eci fic al ly ref eren ce th e § 35 53 (a) f

a c t o r s , it s st at em en ts sh ow th at it wa s a w a r e o f th e st at ut e an d ad eq ua te ly co ns id ered it in

de te rm in in g th e ap pr op ria te se nt en ce. See Uni te d St at es v. Perk in s, 52 6 F.3 d 11 07

, 11 10 –1 1 (8 th Cir . 20 08 ).

-3

-Karas al so su gg es ts th at th e di st ric t co ur t im po se d a se nt en ce th at was "cl earl y

ex ces si ve " be cau se it was to be se rv ed co ns ecu ti ve ly to hi s st at e pr is on se nt en ce. The

su bs ta nt iv e reas on a b le ne ss of a se nt en ce is rev ie wed un de r a de fere nt ia l ab us e of

di sc ret io n s ta nd ard

. Gall v. Unit ed St at es , 55 2 U.S. 38 , 51 (20 07 ). The d eci si on to

im po se a co ns ecu ti ve se nt en ce is rev ie wed fo r reas on ab le ne ss

. See Uni te d St at es v.

M c D o n a l d

, 52 1 F.3 d 97 5, 98 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ). The di st ric t co ur t co ns id ered t h e

ap pr op ria te fact or s, ad eq ua te ly ex pl ai ne d it s reas on in g, se e Ben to n, 62 7 F.3 d at 10 56

,

an d se nt en ced Karas well be lo w th e st at ut or y m ax im um se nt e n ce. 18 U.S.C. §

35 83 (e)( 3)

. W e th eref

or e co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t co ur t act ed reas on ab ly in or de rin g

Karas 's s en te nc e to be ser ve d c on se cu ti ve ly to h is st at e co ur t s en te nc e.

Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

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

-4

-