T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T h e H o n o r ab le R ic h a r d D . C u d a h y , S e n io rU n ite d S ta te s C ir c u it ** J udge f orthe S e ve nth C i r c ui t , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on.

NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. R UD Y L E E WAHC HU MW AH , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 08- 30476 D . C. N o . CR- 0 8 - 2 0 1 6 - W FN ME MO R A N D U M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on W m . F r e m m i ng N i e l s e n, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r14, 2009

S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B e f or e : C U D A H Y , ** S e ni orC i r c ui tJ udge , a nd R A W L I N S O N a nd

C A L L A H A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. 

# FI LED DE C 08 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

A pp el l antR ud y L ee W ahchum w ah appeal s hi s c on vi ct i on for f ai l ure t o regi st er as a s ex offender i n v i ol at i on of the S ex O ff ender R egi stra t i on and N ot i fi ca t i on A ct ( S O RN A ) , se e 1 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 0 , a n d h is 2 4 - m o n th , w ith in - G u id e lin e s s e n te n c e . 1 . W e d ef

er re d su b m issio n o f th is ca se p en d in g th e S u p re m e C o u rt’s de c i s i on i n C arr v . U

ni ted Stat es , 13 0 S . C t . 22 29 (201 0). B ec ause W ahchum w ah w a s i ni t i a l l y pr os e c ut e d a s as e x of f e nde runde rf

e de r a l l a w a nd, i n the pr e s e nt c a s e , w a s c h a r g e d a n d c o n v ic te d o f f a ilin g to r e g is te rw h ile h e w a s r e s id in g in I n d ia n c o u n try in la te 2 0 0 7 , C a rr d o e s n o t a f f e c t th is ap p e a l. See 1 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 0 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( A ) - ( B ) ; C a rr , 130 S . C t . a t2235 n. 3 ( not i ng “ [ f ] orpe r s ons c onvi c t e d of s e x o f f e n s e s u n d e rf

e d e r a l o rI n d ia n tr ib a l law , in te r s ta te tr a v e l is n o t ap r e r e q u is ite t o § 22 50 l i abi l i ty” ). 2 . We r e v i e w de nov o am ot i on t o di s m i s s ba s e d on s t a tut ory or c ons t i tut i ona l i nt e rpr e t a t i on. U ni te d State s v . O the rMe di c i ne , 596 F . 3d 677, 680 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tly d e n ie d W a h c h u m w a h ’s m o tio n to d i sm i ss b ecau se S O RN A i s n o tu n co n st i tu t i o n al l y v ag u e an d b ecau se W ah ch u m w ah ’s co n v icti o n w as n o t co n ti n g en t o n W as h in g to n S tate’s i m p l em en t at i o n o f S O RN A ’ s reg i strat i o n st an d ard s. Se e U ni te d State s v . G e or

ge , N o . 0 8 - 3 0 3 3 9 , 2 0 1 0 W L 3 7 6 8 0 4 7 a t * 1 - 2 ( 9 th C ir . S e p t. 2 9 , 2 0 0 9 ) ; see a l so Ca rr , 1 3 0 S . C t . at2 2 4 0 (n o t i n g th at“ [t ] h e acto f trav el b y a sex o ffen d er m ay serv e as a3

j uri sdi ct i on al predi ca t e f or § 2 25 0, bu ti ti s a l so, l i ke the ac tof po ss es si on , the very c o n d u c t a t w h ic h C o n g r e s s to o ka im ” ) . A d d itio n a lly , S O RN A is ap e rm is s ib le e x e r c is e o f

C o n g r e s s ’s C o m m e r c e C lau s e p o w e r . Id . a t * 3 - 4 ; see a l so Ca rr , 1 3 0 S. C t. a t 2 2 3 8 ( ap p r o v in g C o n g r e s s ’s d e c is io n to s u b je c t c e rta in “o f

f e n d e r s to c r i m i na l l i abi l i ty onl y w he n, a f t e rS O RN A ’ s e na c tm e nt , the y us e the c ha nne l of in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e in e v a d in g aS ta te ’s r e a c h ” ) . 3 . We r e v i e w de nov o w hether apri or conv i ct i on m aybe used t o cal cul at e a d e f e n d a n t’s c r im in a l h is to ry s c o r e . See U ni ted Stat es v. A l len , 153 F . 3d 1037, 1040 ( 9th C i r . 1998) . A l though the s i gni ng of apl e af orm w i thouta n e xpl i c i tw a i ve rof coun se l do es no tnece ss ar i l y c on st i tut e aw ai ver of c l ai m t o cou nsel , here , W a hc hum w a h’ s c r i m i na l hi s t ory w a s pr ope r l y e nha nc e d ba s e d on hi s c onvi c t i on be c aus e he f

a i l e d t o ove r c om e the pr e s um pt i on tha tthe r e w a s ava l i d w a i ve rof c o u n s e l. Se e i d. a t 1 0 4 1 ; U ni te d State s v . Mul loy , 3 F . 3d 13 37 , 13 39 (9th C i r. 1993) ( e xpl a i ni ng tha tade f e nda ntm a y notm e e thi s bur de n w i th as i l e ntor m i ss i ng re cord). 4. W e r e vi e w ade f

e nda nt ’ s s e nt e nc e f

i r s tf orpr oc e dur a l e rr ora nd s e c ond f or s u b s ta n tiv e r e a s o n ab le n e s s . U n ite d S ta te s v . C a r ty , 5 2 0 F .3 d 9 8 4 , 9 9 3 ( 9 th C ir .) ( e n b a n c ) , ce rt. deni ed sub n om . Zavala v. U ni ted Stat es , 5 5 3 U .S . 1 0 6 1 ( 2 0 0 8 ) . W a h c h u m w a h a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o m m itte d p r o c e d u r a l e rr o rb e c au s e it4

f a i l e d t o a ddr e s s hi s a r gum e nt s tha t( 1) he w a s de ni e d the opportuni ty t o s e e k a pa rt i a l l y c onc urr e nts e nt e nc e f oras upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e vi ol a t i on a nd f orthe pr e s e nt vi ol at i on of S O RN A ; (2) S ent enci ng G ui del i ne § 2 A 3. 5 i s notbase d o n p roper s tudy orr e s e a r c h; a nd ( 3) the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d note xpl a i n i t s r e a s ons f orde ny i ng hi s r equestfor an 1 8-m on th sent ence com bi ned w i th 6 m on ths i n a re si dent i al re e ntry c e nt e r . W a hc hum w a h di d notobj e c tt o the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s pr oc e dur e dur i ng s e n te n c in g , s o w e r e v ie w f o rp la in e rr o r . Se e U

ni te d State s v . W

akni ne , 543 F . 3d 54 6, 55 1 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). T he di stri ctcourtdi d n oterr: i tqu es t i on ed W ahchum w ah’ s c ou nsel re gardi ng hi s argum ent s f or a l ow erse nt ence , i nd i ca t ed thati thad revi ew ed the papers subm i tt ed and exp re ss l y c on si dere d the G ui del i nes a n d th e 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s in m a k in g its s e n te n c in g d e te rm in a tio n . See, e . g. , R i ta v. U

ni ted Stat es , 551 U . S . 338, 356- 58 ( 2007) ( hol di ng tha t“ [ t ] he se nt enci ng j ud ge shou l d setforth eno ug h t o sat i sf y the appel l at e c ou rtthathe has c o n s i d e r e d th e p a rt i e s ’ a r g u m e n t s a n d h a s ar e a s o n e d b a s i s f o re x e r c i s i n g h i s o wn le g a l d e c is io n m a k in g au th o r ity ,” a n d th a t “w h e n aju d g e d e c id e s s im p ly to ap p ly the G ui de l i ne s t o apa rt i c ul a rc a s e , doi ng s o w i l l notne c e s s a r i l y r e qui r e l e ngthy e x p la n a tio n ” ) . M o r e o v e r , W a h c h u m w a h h a s n o t p r o v e d p r e ju d ic e . See U

ni ted State s v . M

ar c us , 130 S . C t . 2159, 2164 ( 2010) ( the “ s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s ” pr ong of th e p l ai n erro r t estn o rm al l y req u i res th e d efen d an tt o p ro v e th atth ere i s a5

“ re as on abl e probabi l i ty thatthe error a ff ec t ed the ou t com e of the di stri ctcourt p r o c e e d in g s ” ) ; U

ni te d State s v . D al lm an , 53 3 F . 3d 75 5, 76 2 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). T h e d i s tr i c tc o u rti s th e r e f o r e AF F I R ME D.