## 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- 24 91

__ __ __ __ __ _
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. * W es te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

* Eric L. Mack
, * [UNPUBLISHED]

* App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 13 , 20 12 Fi le d: Feb ru ary 21 , 20 12

__ __ __ __ __ _
Befo re LOKEN, BOW MAN, an d B YE, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _
PER CURI AM.

Afte r Eric Mac k vi ol at ed th e te rm s of hi s su pe rv is ed rel eas e, th e Dis tri ct Co ur t 1

rev ok ed Mac k’s rel eas e an d se nt en ced hi m to ei gh te en m on th s in pr is on fo ll owe d by
twel ve m on th s o f su pe rv is ed rel eas e. The co ur t im po se d sev eral sp eci al co nd it io ns of su pe rv is ed rel eas e, two of wh ic h M ack ap pe al s. We affir m

.

The Hon or ab l e D e a n W hi pp le , Un it ed St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.In ge ne ral
, a di st ric t co ur t ha s wid e di sc ret io n to im po se sp eci al co nd it io ns of

su pe rv is ed rel eas e as lo ng as th os e co nd it io ns are reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e na tu re an d

c irc um st an ces of th e of

fen se , th e hi st or y an d ch arac te ris ti cs of th e de fen d a n t , t h e d et erre nc e of cri m in al co nd uc t, th e pr ot ect io n of th e pu bl ic fro m an y fu tu re cri mes of th e de fen da nt , a n d t h e de fen da nt ’s co rrec ti on al ne ed s; th e co nd it io ns do no t in vo lv e a d e p r i v at io n of li be rty th at is gr eat er th an reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry to de te r cri m in al co nd uc t, pr ot ect th e pu bl ic
, an d pr om ot e th e de fen da nt ’s co rrec ti on al ne ed s;

an d th e co nd it io ns are con si st en t with an y pe rti ne nt Sen te nc in g Co m m is si on po li cy
st at em en ts

. 18 U.S.C. § 35 83 (d ); Uni te d St at es v. Bo st on , 49 4 F.3 d 66 0, 66 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ). A sp eci al co nd it io n m us t be ta il or ed to ach ie ve th es e pu rp os es , an d it m us t be

su pp or te d by in di vi du al iz ed fin di ng s ab ou t it s ap pr op ria te ne ss fo r a pa rti cu la r de fen da nt

. See Uni te d St at es v. Ben de r, 56 6 F.3 d 74 8, 75 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). Bu t ev en if a di st ric t co ur t fai ls to m ak e th e req ui si te in di vi du al iz ed fin di ng s, we ne ed no t

va cat e a sp eci al co nd it io n “ if th e ba si s fo r th e i mp o s ed co nd it io n can be di sc ern ed
fro m th e rec or d.” Uni te d S ta te s v . Tho m ps on , 65 3 F .3d 68 8, 6 94 (8t h C ir. 2 01 1)

.

M a c k fir st arg ue s th at th e Dis tri ct Co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by im po s i n g Sp eci al Co nd it io n 2
, whi ch pr oh ib it s Mac k fro m “ co ns um [in g] or po ss es s[ in g]
al co ho li c be ve rag es or be er” or en te ri n g “ an y es ta bl is hm en t whe re al co ho li c be ve rag es are th e pr im ary it em s fo r sa le .” Ju dg m en t at 4. W e ha ve ge ne ral ly up he ld
ba ns on al co ho l co ns um pt io n fo r d e f

e n d an ts wit h su bs ta nc e-ab us e pr ob le m s, bu t whe n su ch a b an is no t s up po rte d b y th e d efen da nt 's h is to ry

or c rime of co nv ic ti on ,

w e ha ve rev ers ed

. See, e.g ., Uni te d St at es v. Si m on s, 61 4 F.3 d 47 5, 4 8 0 ( 8 t h C i r

. 20 10 ) (co ll ect in g cas es ). Here, th e Dis tri ct Co ur t jud ge who pr es id ed ov er M a ck ’s

rev oc at io n he ari ng al so p r e s i d e d ov er th e pr oc eed in gs fo r hi s un de rlyin g dr ug of fen se , an d th e co ur t was well aware of Mac k’s c r i m in al hi st or y

. Mac k’s 20 01
Pres en te nc e In ve st ig at io n Rep or t (PSR ) in di cat ed th at he ha d th ree pr io r co nv ic ti on s fo r DUI of

fen se s, th at he ha d us ed al co ho l “ al m os t da il y ” si nc e th e ag e of twen ty, an d
th at he was a co nf

es se d al co ho li c. PSR ¶ 63

. W he n Mac k was arre st ed fo r th e m os t

rece nt vi ol at io n of hi s su pe rv is ed rel eas e, he ad m it t e d t o o f f ic ers th at he ha d us ed

-2

-crac k a few da y s earl ie r, an d th e PSR no te d th at Mac k “ ‘sno rte d’ po wde r co cai ne an

av erag e of two ti m es m on th ly un ti l hi s arre st .” Id

. ¶ 65

. At Mac k’s rev oc at io n he ari ng , th e Dis tri ct Co ur t ex pl ai ne d th e ne ed fo r a co m pl et e al co ho l ba n by no ti ng ,

“ [Y]ou’ve us ed dr ug s in th e pa st

. And m y ex pe rie nc e ha s be en , so m eb od y ge ts to dr in ki ng an d th ey lo se th ei r ab il it y to res is t th e te m pt at io n to go on to dr ug s. Tha t’s why I wan t it in th ere.” Rev oc at io n Hr’g Tr. at 11

. The reco rd sh ows th at a co m pl et e ba n on al co ho l co ns um

pt io n was ap pr op ria te in li gh t of Mac k’s ad m it te d al co ho li sm , hi s dr ug hi st or y , an d hi s o v e r a l l cri m in al hi st or y —i nc lu di ng hi s th ree DUI

co nv ic ti on s an d on go in g dr ug us e. The co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n by im po si ng

a co m pl et e ba n on al co ho l i n th es e ci rcu m st an ces

. See Uni te d St at es v. Fo rd e, 66 4
F.3 d 12 19
, 12 23 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (u ph ol di ng ba n on al co ho l c o n su m pt io n be cau se th reat of c ro ss -ad di ct io n t o d ru g- de pe nd en t d efen da nt was n ot pu re s pe cu la ti on ).

Mac k ne xt arg ue s t h a t th e Dis tri ct Co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by im po si ng Sp eci al Co nd it io n 4, whi ch req ui res th at Mac k “ be at hi s pl ace of res id en ce be twee n th e ho ur s of 10 :0 0 p.m

. an d 6: 00 a.m ., 7 da y s pe r week
, un le ss hi s wor k sc he du le

r e q u i r e s hi m to be at wor k pa st 10 :0 0 p.m .” J. of Ju ne 24
, 20 11
, at 4. The co u r t ad vi se d Mac k th at in it s ex pe rie nc e, m os t de fen da nt s who “ vi ol at e su pe rv is ed rel eas e do it aft er 10 :0 0 p.m .” an d st at ed
, “ I do n’t wan t y ou ou t so ci al iz in g or do in g an y th in g
pa st 10 :0 0 p.m .” Rev oc at io n Hr’g Tr. at 11

. We h a v e u p he ld th e im po si ti on of a

cu rfew if it is reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e pr ot ect io n of th e pu bl ic
, th e reh ab il it at io n an d
effe ct iv e co rrec ti on al tre at m en t of th e de fen da nt , an d th e de te rren ce of fu tu re cri m es by th e de fen da nt

. See Uni te d St at es v. Asa la ti
, 61 5 F.3 d 10 01
, 10 07 –0 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). Here, th e PSR in di cat ed th at Mac k’s arre st fo r hi s se co nd DUI of fen se

oc cu rred at 2: 30 a.m ., aft er Mac k was st op pe d fo r sp eed in g, an d hi s th ird DUI arre st

oc cu rred at 1: 22 a.m

. P S R ¶ ¶ 4 8, 49

. Bec au se Mac k’s cri m in al hi st or y su pp or ts im po si ti on of a cu rfew an d th e cu rfew is reas on ab ly rel at ed to th e pr ot ect io n of th e
pu bl i c an d Mac k’s reh ab il it at iv e an d co rrec ti on al ne ed s, th e Dis tri ct Co ur t di d no t ab us e it s d is cret io n b y

im po si ng th is co nd it io n.

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af fir m th e jud gm en t o f th e Dis tri ct Co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
-3

-