# U n i t e d S t a t e s C o u r t o f A pp e a l s
For the Eig hth Circu it

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

No . 1 9 -2 1 26

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

Un i t ed St at es o f Am eri ca

l ll l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l Pl a i n t i

f f - Ap pel l ee

v

.

St uart Co l e M i t ch el l

l ll l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l Def

en da n t - Ap pel l an t

_ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _

Ap p eal fro m

Un i t ed St at es Di s t ri ct Co u rt
fo r t h e Eas t ern Di s t ri ct o f Ark an s as - Li t t l e Ro ck

_ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _

Su b m i t t ed : J an u ary 1 3

, 2 0 2 0

Fi l ed : M arch 2 5 , 2 0 2 0
[Un pu b l is h ed ]

_ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _

Befo re BENTON, GRASZ, an d STRAS, Ci rcu i t J u d g es

.

_ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _

PER CURIAM

.

In 2 0 0 9

, St u art C o le M i t ch el l p l ed g u i l t y t o at tem pt ed recei p t o f ch i ld

p o rn og rap hy i n v i o l at i o n o f 1 8 U.S.C. § 2 2 5 2 (a)(2 ). Th e d is t ri ct co urt 1 s en t en ced h i m

1 Th e Ho n o rab le Bri an S. M i l l er, Un it ed St at es Di s t ri c t J u d ge fo r t h e Eas t ern Di s t ri ct o f Ark an sas

.t o 6 3 m o n t h s o f i m pri so n m en t

, f

o l l o w e d b y fi v e y ears o f s u p erv i s ed rel eas e. Th e

o ri g i nal t erm o f s u p erv i s ed rel eas e b eg an i n Feb ru ary 20 1 4, bu t w as rev o k ed o n fo u r

d i fferen t o ccas i o n s fo r v i o l at i o n s o f t h e co n d i t i o n s o f rel eas e. T wo o f th e fi rs t t h ree

rev o cat i on s were fo l l o w e d b y s h o rt p eri od s o f i n carcerat i o n an d fu rt h er s up erv i s ed

rel eas e. Aft er t h e fo u rt h rev o cat i o n
, M i t ch el l was s en t en ced t o t h ree m o n th s o f h o m e

d et en t i o n
, t o b e fo l l owed b y t h e rem ai n i n g t erm of s u perv i s ed rel eas e. Ho w ev er, day s

l at er, M i t ch el l v i o l at ed h i s s u p erv is ed rel eas e fo r th e fi ft h t im e, t h i s t i m e fo r

p o s s es s i n g s ex u al l y ex pl i ci t p h o t o grap h s o n h i s cel l p h on e.

In M ay 2 0 1 9 , t h e g ov ern m en t fi l ed a m o t i on t o rev o ke M i t ch el l ’ s s up erv i s ed

rel eas e b as ed o n t h e s ex u al ly ex p l i ci t p h o to g rap h s o n h i s p h o ne, h i s fai l u re t o rep o rt

t o h is p ro b at i o n o ffi cer, h i s fai l u re t o co m p l y wi th h is ap p ro v ed l ocat i o n m o n i t o ri n g

s ch ed u l e, an d h i s fai l u re t o at t en d s ex o ffen d er treat m en t

. Mi tch el l ’ s reco m m en d ed

s en t en ce u n d er t h e Un i t ed St at es Sen t en ci n g Gu i d el i n es M an u al (“ Gu i d el i n es ”) was

fro m t h ree t o n i n e m o n t h s o f i n carcerat i o n
, bu t 18 U.S.C. § 3 5 83 (e)(3 ) au t h o ri zed u p

t o t wo y ears o f i n carcerat i o n

. Th e g o v ern m en t reco m m en d ed M i t ch el l b e s en t en ced

t o t h e s t at u t o ry m ax i m

u m o f two y ears o f i m

p ri s o n m en t wi t h n o fu rt h er s up erv i s ed

rel eas e, gi v en M i t ch el l ’ s co n ti n u o u s s u p erv i s ed -rel eas e s t ru g g l es an d fai l u re to

m ean i n g fu l l y en g ag e wi t h t h e t reat m en t o ffered

.

Du ri n g t h e rev o cat i on pro ceed i n g s
, th e di s t ri ct ju dg e n ot ed th at th e un d erl y i n g

cas e w a s f or ch il d p orn og rap h y , ack n o wl ed g ed t h at Mi tch el l ’ s s u p erv i s ed rel eas e was

rev o k ed fo u r ti m es p rev i o u sl y , an d t h en co n cl u d ed t hat t h e s t a t u t ory m ax i m u m

s en t en c e w i t h o u t an y fu rt her s u p erv i si o n wo u ld b e m o st ap p ro p ri at e “ t o affo rd

ad eq uat e d et erren ce t o h i s co n d u ct an d p ro m o t e res p ect f o r th e l aw.” On ap p eal

, M i t ch el l arg u es t h e d is t ri ct co u rt ’s t wo -y ear s en t en ce was pro ced u ral l y an d

s u b s t an t i vel y u n reas on ab l e.

W e rev i ew “ a sen ten ce i m p os ed u p o n rev o cat io n o f su p erv is ed rel eas e

. . . fo r

an ab u s e o f d i scret i o n

. ” Un i t ed S t a t es v. W h i t e , 8 4 0 F.3 d 5 5 0

, 5 5 4 (8 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 6 ).

-2

-Th i s i s “ th e s am e ‘ d eferen t i al ab u s e-o f-d i scret i o n ’ s tan d ard t hat ap pl i es t o i n i t i al

s en t en ci n g p ro ceed i n g s.” Id

. at 5 5 2 (q uo t i n g Un i t ed S t a t es v. Y o u n g , 6 4 0 F.3 d 8 4 6,

8 4 8 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 11 )).

On ap peal

, M i t ch el l arg u es h i s s en t en ce i s p ro ced u ral l y u n reas o n ab l e b ecau s e

t h e d i st ri ct co u rt d i d n o t co n s i d er al l rel ev an t 1 8 U .S.C. § 3 5 5 3 (a) fact o rs
, as req u i red

b y 1 8 U.S.C. § 3 58 3 (e). Sp eci fi cal l y , M i t ch el l as s ert s th e d i s t ri ct co urt fai l ed to

co n si d er “ t h e n eed t o av o i d u n warran t ed s en t en ci n g d is pari t i es ” i n § 3 5 5 3 (a)(6 ).

Ho wev er, t h e d i st ri ct co u rt need n o t “ m ech an i cal l y l i s t ev ery § 35 5 3 (a) co n s i d erat i o n

wh en s en t en ci n g a d efen d an t u p o n rev o cat i o n o f s up erv i sed rel eas e.” Un i t ed S t a t es

v. Th u n d er , 55 3 F.3 d 6 05

, 6 08 (8 t h Ci r. 2 00 9 ) (q u ot in g Un i t ed S t a tes v. W h i t e Fa ce , 3 8 3 F.3 d 7 3 3

, 7 4 0 (8 t h Ci r. 2 0 0 4 )). It i s p erm i s s i bl e to “ g iv e so m e fact o rs l es s wei g ht

t h an a d efen dan t p refers o r m o re [wei g ht ] t o o t her fact o rs [an d ] t h at al o n e d o es n ot
ju s t ify rev ers al .” Un i ted S t a tes v. An d er s on , 6 18 F.3 d 8 7 3 , 8 8 3 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 1 0 ).

Here, t h e d i st ri ct co u rt p ro p erl y co n s i d ered M i t ch el l ’ s h i s t o ry an d

ch aract eri s ti cs
, t h e n at u re an d ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h e offen s e, t h e n eed fo r an ad eq u at e

s en t en ce t o d et er fu t u re co n d u ct

, an d t h e ap p l i cab l e Gu i del i nes ran g e. An d

, al t h o u g h

t h e d i st ri ct co u rt di d n o t sp eci fi cal l y di s cu s s un warran t ed s en t en ci n g d i s p ari t i es
, i t

cl earl y co n s i dered an d wei g h ed t h e s en t en ci n g fact o rs an d ch o se t o g i v e so m e fact o rs
, l i k e § 3 5 5 3(a)(6 ), l es s wei g h t t h an o t h ers

. Su ch a d eci s i o n i s wi t h i n t h e d i s tri c t

co u rt ’ s “ wi d e l at i tu d e t o wei g h t h e § 3 5 5 3 (a) fact o rs in each c a s e a n d as s i g n s o m e

fact ors g reat er wei g h t t h an o t h ers in d et erm i ni n g t h e ap p ro p ri at e sen t en ce.” Un i t ed

S t a t es v. Br i dg es , 5 6 9 F.3 d 3 7 4

, 3 7 9 (8 t h Ci r. 2 00 9 ). Th erefo re, t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt d id

n o t ab us e i t s d i s cret i o n an d t he s en t en ce was p ro ced u ral l y reas o n ab l e.

Si m i l arl y , M i t ch el l arg u es h i s s en ten ce i s su b st an t i v el y u n reas o n ab l e b ecau s e

t h e d i st ri ct co u rt s p eci fi cal l y co n s i d ered wh et h er h is s en t en ce wo u l d h el p t o p ro m o t e

res p ect fo r t h e l aw u nd er 1 8 U.S.C. § 3 5 5 3 (a)(2 )(A), a fact o r ex cl u d ed fro m t h e l i s t

o f ap p ro p ri at e fact o rs t o co n s i d er fo r r e v o cat i o n u n d er 1 8 U.S.C. § 3 5 8 3 (e).

-3

-“ Ho wev er, o n ab u s e o f d i s cret i o n rev i ew fo r s ub s tan t i v e reas o n ab l en es s
, we ex am i n e

fo r wh et h er th e d is t ri ct co u rt ‘ g [av e] s i g n i f i ca nt wei g h t t o an im

pro p er o r i rrel ev an t

fact or.’ ” U

n i t e d S t a t es v. Ha l l

, 9 3 1 F.3 d 6 9 4, 69 7 (8 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 9) (al t erat i o n in

o ri g i nal ) (q u o t i n g Un i t ed S t a tes v. Feems ter , 5 7 2 F.3 d 4 5 5 , 4 6 1 (8 t h Ci r. 2 0 0 9 ) (en

b an c)). H ere, l i k e i n Ha l l

, t h e d i s t ri ct co u rt di s cu ss ed

, in s up p ort o f i ts s en t en ce, t h e

n at u re an d ci rcu m s t an ces o f t h e o ffen s e, l o o k ed at M i tch el l ’ s cri m in al h i s t o ry
,

ex p lai n ed t h e n eed to ad eq u at el y d et er M i t ch el l ’ s fu t u re co n d uct — al l p ro p er fact o rs

fo r co n s id erat i o n o f rev o cat i o n

— an d t h en a l s o m en t io n ed p ro m o t i n g res p ect fo r t h e

l aw. Th e d i s t ri ct co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n h ere i s an i n st an ce o f “ u s i n g an ex cl u d ed fact o r as

a n i n s i g n i fi can t ju s ti fi cat i o n ” res ul t in g i n “ n o su b s t an t i v e erro r” an d t h ere f o r e n o

ab u se o f d i s cret i o n

. Id

.

Becau s e w e fi n d no e r r o r, p ro ced u ral o r s u b s t an t i ve, i n t he d is tri ct co urt ’ s

rev o cat i on s en ten ce, we affi rm

.

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

-4

-