2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-18-2009 

# U SA v . Mich a el D elbuono P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-3603

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . Mich a e l D e lbuono " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 77. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/77NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 08- 3603 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. M I CH AE L DE L BU ONO a / k / a DEL M i chae l D el buono, A ppel l ant A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C r i m i nal A ct i on N o. 2- 07- cr - 00677- 001) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le N o rm a L . S h ap ir o Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

N ovember9, 2009 B efor e: A M B R O , G A R T H , and R O T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: D ece m ber18, 2009)

OP I NI ON A M B R O , C i r cui tJ udge M i chae l D el B uono appea l s hi s s ent ence aft erhe pl ed gui l t yt o t hr ee of fens es : ( 1) cons pi r acyt o di s t r i but e her oi n i n vi ol at i on of 21 U . S. C . §§ 846 and 841( b) ( 1) ( C ) ; ( 2)2

di s t r i but i on of her oi n i n vi ol at i on of 21 U . S. C . § 841( a) ( 1) ; and ( 3) di s t r i but i on, and ai di ng and abe t t i ng t he di s t r i but i on, of her oi n i n vi ol at i on of 21 U . S. C . § 842 and 18 U . S. C . § 2. D el B uono cl ai m s t hatt he C our tabus ed i t s di s cr et i on i n cons i der i ng the r el evants ent enci ng fac t or s under18 U . S. C . § 3553( a) and that , i n anyevent , hi s s ent ence wa s u n r e a s o n a b l e . W e d i s a g r e e a n d th u s a f f i r m. I n O ct ober2007, D el B uono w as i ndi ct ed bya fe der al gr and j ury . T he i ndi ctm ent char ged hi m w i t h t he cr i m es not ed above , t o al l of w hi ch he pl ed gui l t y . T hi s w as an open pl ea, notpur s uantt o anyw r i t t en agr eementw i t h t he G overnm ent . D el B uono does no tchall eng e his plea nor the fa ctual basi s. Pr i ort o s ent enci ng, t he fi nal Pr e- Sent ence I nves t i gat i on R epor tw as i s s ued byt he as s i gned U ni t ed St at es Pr obat i on O ffi cer . I tconcl uded thatthe advi s oryG ui del i nes r ange w as 188 t o 235 m ont hs ’ i ncar cer at i on. A tthatt i m e, the G overnm ents ubm i t t ed a Sent enci ng M emora ndum t hatas ked the D i s t r i ctC our tt o i m pos e a s ent ence w i t hi n t he advi s or yr ange. I n A ugus t2008, t w o day s befor e the s ent enci ng hear i ng, D el B uono as ked fora s ent ence att he bot t om of the G ui del i nes r ange. T hr ough hi s couns el , he su b m itt e d to th e C o u rt n u m e ro u s le tters o f su p p o rt f

ro m m e m b e rs o f

th e c o m m u n ity w her e he l i ved. O n exami nat i on, t he G overnm entconcl uded thatatl eas ts om e of the l ett er s of su p p o rtw ere fra u d u lentlycre ated b yD elB u o n o ’s si ster. T h is w as d eterm ined in p art t hr ough r ecor di ngs of D el B uono’ s t el ephone c onver s at i ons atthe Feder al D et ent i on3

C ent eri n Phi l adel phi a. T he G overnm entthen pr epar ed a M ot i on forU pw ar d V ar i ance , w hi ch i tfi l ed i m m edi at el ypr i ort o the s ent enci ng hear i ng. T he D i s t r i ctC our tas ked the G overnm entand D el B uono w hetherei t herw ant ed a c ont i nuance forpurpos es of r es pondi ng, butD el B uono and couns el s t at ed thattheyw er e pr epar ed t o pr ocee d. L at er i n t he hea r i ng, t he G overnm entw i t hdr ew i t s M ot i on forU pw ar d V ar i ance and i ns t ead ar gued fora s ent ence att he hi gh end of the G ui del i nes r ange ba s ed i n par ton t he s ubm i s s i on of fr audul entl et t er s . T he C our ts peci fi cal l ys t at ed thati tw oul d i gnor e the all eg ed lyfa b ri ca ted lett ers the m selv es, bu t w o u ld tak e into co n side rati o n D elB u o n o ’s a p p a re n t ap p ro v a l an d e n c o u ra g e m e n t o f th e ir c re a tio n . T h e C o u rt a lso sta ted th a t it w o u ld p a y“ re s p e c tf

u l a tte n tio n ” to le tte rs th a t w e re s ig n e d a n d a p p e a re d g e n u in e . F in a lly , d u rin g a rg u m e n t b yc o u n se l f o r D e lB u o n o , the C o u rt sp e c if ica llyn o ted th a t it w o u ld tak e into co n side rati o n the f ac tors in § 3 5 5 3 (a). A ft erar gum ent , D el B uono w as s ent ence d t o 230 m ont hs ’ i m pr i s onm ent . T he D i s t r i ctC our ts t at ed i t s r eas oni ng on t he r ecor d, t aki ng car e t o di s cus s the fa ct or s under § 3553( a) . T he C our ts t at ed thati thad i nt ended t o s ent ence D el B uono atthe bot t om of the G u idelines ran g e, bu t i n li g h t of the p rese n tat ion o f f

alse lett ers w ith D elB u o n o ’s encour agement , i ts ent ence d hi m atthe t op of the r ange. H e now appea l s thats ent ence . T he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on under18 U . S. C . § 3231. W e have j ur i s di ct i on under28 U . S. C . § 1291. T o t he ext entD el B uono cont ends thathi s s ent ence w as i m pos ed i n vi ol at i on of l aw , w e have j ur i s di ct i on under18 U . S. C . § 3742.W e not e thati ti s uncl earw hetherD el B uono i s as s ert i ng s i gni fi cantpr ocedur al err or 1 byt he C our ti n arr i vi ng ati t s deci s i on. W hi l e he c i t es t o l egal author i t ythates t abl i s hes t he nee d forpr ocedur al r eas onabl enes s , he does notas s ertanypart i cul arpr ocedur al err or and i nst ead co ntends that the sentence “si m plyrefl ect ed the C ou rt ’s frustrat i on w i t h [h i s] pr i orcr i m i nal r ecor d. ” ( See A p p ell an t’ s B r. 4 , 6 . ) E v en if D elB u o n o d o es a ssert pr ocedur al err or , w e s ee no s uch err orher e. 4 W e re v ie w a s e n te n c e u n d e r a d e f e re n tia l a b u s e -o f

-d is c re tio n s ta n d a rd . U ni t ed Stat es v. Jones , 5 6 6 F . 3 d 3 5 3 , 3 6 6 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) ( ci t i ng G al lv. U ni t ed Stat es , 55 2 U. S. 38, 128 S. C t . 586, 597 ( 2007) ) . W e fi r s tens ur e thatthe D i s t r i ctC our tcomm i t t ed no s i gni fi cantpr ocedur al err ori n arr i vi ng ati t s deci s i on; s econd, w e r evi ew the s ubs t ant i ve re a s o n a b le n e s s o f

th e s e n te n c e . Id . (cit ati o n o m itted). T he onl yques t i on appea l ed byD el B uono i s w hetherthe D i s t r i ctC our tw as unr eas onabl e i n s ent enci ng hi m t o 230 m ont hs ’ i m pr i s onm entand w hethers uch a sen tenc e w as g rea ter th an n ec essa ryto ac co u n t fo r all sen tenc ing fa ctors in § 3 5 5 3 (a). 1 Speci fi cal l y , he ar gues t hatt he C our t“fa i l ed t o gi ve r el evantfac t or s the s i gni fi cant w e ig h t th a t s h o u ld h a v e b e e n a f f o rd e d th o s e f

a c to rs ,” s u c h a s h is “ h o rr if ic u p b ri n g in g ,” hi s “l ow eri nt el l ectual abi l i t y , ” and hi s “mostobvi ous drug abus e thatw entuntr eat ed. ” H e a lso d ra w s a tten tio n to th e f ra u d u len t lette rs, a rg u in g th a t th e C o u rt im p ro p e rly c o n s i d e r e d t h e m a f

t e rt h e G o v e r n m e n tw i t h d r e w i t s m o t i o n f o ra n u p w a r d v a r i a n c e . We s e e n o a b u s e o f

d is c re tio n . W hi l e a di s t r i ctcour tneed notdi s cus s and make fi ndi ngs as t o eac h § 3553( a)T he sect i on reads i n p ert i nen tpartas fol l ow s: 2 T h e c o u r ts h a l l i m p o s e a s e n t e n c e s u f f i c i e n t , b u tn o tg r e a t e rth a n n e c e s s a r y, to c o m p ly w ith th e p u rp o s e s s e t f o rt h in p a ra g ra p h (2 ) o f th is s u b s e c tio n . T h e c o u rt, i n d e ter m in in g th e p a rticu lar se n ten c e to b e im p o se d , sh a ll co n side r— ( 1) t he natur e and c i r cumst ance s of the off ens e and the hi s t oryand c h a ra c ter istics o f

th e d e f e n d a n t; ( 2) t he nee d fort he s ent ence i m pos ed— ( A ) t o r efl ectt he s er i ous nes s of the off ens e, t o pr om ot e r es pect fort he l aw , and t o pr ovi de j us tpuni s hm entforthe off ens e; (B ) to a f

f o rd a d e q u a te d e ter re n c e to c rim in a l co n d u c t; ( C ) t o pr ot ectt he publ i c fr om fur t hercr i m es of the def endant ; and ( D ) t o pr ovi de the def endantw i t h neede d educa t i onal or vocat i onal t r ai ni ng, m edi cal car e, orot hercorr ect i onal tr ea tm en t i n the m o st eff ec ti v e m an n er; (3 ) th e k in d s o f

se n ten c e s a v a ilab le; ( 4) t he ki nds of s ent ence and the s ent enci ng r ange e s t abl i s hed for . . . the ap p li ca b le ca tego ryo f o ff en se c o m m itted b ythe a p p li ca b le ca tego ry o f d e f e n d a n t a s s e t f

o rt h in th e g u id e lin e s . . .

. . . . ( 5) anyper t i nentpol i cys t at ement. . . i s s ued bythe Sent enci ng C o m m iss io n . . . [;]

. . . . (6 ) th e n e e d to a v o id u n w a rra n ted se n ten c e d isp a rities a m o n g d e f e n d a n ts w i t h s i m i l arr ecor ds w ho have be en found gui l t yof s i m i l arconduct ; and (7 ) t h e n e e d to p ro v id e re s titu tio n to a n yv ic tim s o f th e o f f e n s e . 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 5 5 3 (a). 5 fac t or i f the r ecor d m akes cl eari tt ook t he fa ct or s i nt o acc ounti n s ent enci ng and gave

2 t hem m eani ngful cons i der at i on, her e the C our ts y s t emat i cal l yw entthr ough t he var i ous fac t or s . I ts peci fi cal l ycons i der ed the hi s t oryand cha r act er i s t i cs of D el B uono, not i ng t hat6

al t hough he had pr obl ems gr ow i ng up, he i s “a s m art , gr ow n- up m an [w ho] s houl d [have ] know n bet t er . ” I tal s o not ed thathe appa r ent l ynevertr i ed t o geta l egi t i m at e j ob, and u p o n h is re lea se f

ro m p riso n f

o r a p rio r o f

f e n se , h e w e n t “b a c k to lea d in g a h e ro in di s t r i but i on gang. ” H e “s how [ed] no i ncl i nat i on t o change hi s w ay s . . . [, as ] he’ s had a t hi r d, four t h, and fi fth chanc e. ” W i t h r es pectt o t he natur e and c i r cumst ance s of the offe ns e, t he C our tnot ed thatD el B uono w as the l eade rof the gang, “notj us ta s t r eet fo ll o w er.” Italso n o ted th at th ere w as n o n ee d fo r dru g reh ab il it ati o n . D elB u o n o ’s couns el , t he s ame at t or neyw ho r epr es ent s hi m on appea l , conce ded ats ent enci ng that D el B uo no w as “obv i ou sl y ” no ta drug a dd i ctand “ha[ d]n’tbeen for a w hil e. ” H e al so co n ce d ed that there w as n o thing in the rec o rd to su g g est th at th e p ri o r dru g o ff en ses w ere t h e r e s u l to f

a p e r s o n a l n e e d f

o rd ru g s i n s t e a d o f

a n e e d f o rm o n e y. T he C our tcons i der ed D el B uono’ s ar gum ent s w hether10, 12, or13 y ear s w oul d be s uffi ci entt o s end a mes s age t o t he comm uni t y , and i tconcl uded thata l ongers ent ence w o u ld “ k e e p [ ] th e c o m m u n itysa f e w h ile h e ’s p u t aw a y ” a n d th e re b yp ro tec t th e p u b lic fr om fur t hercr i m es byD el B uono. T he C our tal s o cons i der ed the r ehabi l i t at i ve purpos es of the s ent ence fr om a voca t i onal s t andpoi nt , emphasi zi ng thatthe s ent ence i m pos ed w oul d “gi ve [D el B uono] a cha nce t o devel op a ca r eer , geta j ob i n pr i s on and l earn how t o do s om ethi ng and ea r n m oneyl egal l y , w hi ch w i l l be s om ethi ng new and novel for [hi m ] w hen [he ] get [s ] out . ” I tcons i der ed as w el l the otherki nds of s ent ence s avai l abl e, and conc l uded i m pr i s onm entw as nece s s ary . C om par i ng the s ent ence s of hi s co-7

d e f e n d a n ts a n d o th e r d e f

e n d a n ts w ith sim ilar r e c o rd s a n d sim ilar c o n d u c t, th e C o u rt d id n o t b e liev e th e re w o u ld b e a n yu n w a rra n ted se n ten c e d isp a rity , n o tin g th a t so m e d isp a rity w as w arr ant ed due t o D el B uono’ s r i ngl eade rpos i t i on. W ith resp ec t t o the lett ers, th e C o u rtb ase d it s co n clus ion n o t on the G o v ern m en t’ s w i t hdr aw n m ot i on foran upw ar d var i ance , buti ns t ead on the ar gum entatthe s ent enci ng heari ng and i t s ow n findi ng s that the sub m i ssi on of f raudulentl et t ers of sup po rt“i s a c o n t e m p to f

c o u r tt h a td e s e r v e s t o b e t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . ” I ta d d e d : “ F o r tu n a t e l y, I ’ m notcompl et el ys tupi d, and I r ecogni zed s om e of them t hatI had t i m e t o r ead a s fake . ” I tl at erconcl uded: “[Y ] ou cert ai nl yencour aged y ours i s t erand al l ow ed hert o t hi nk s he w as doi ng s om ethi ng t o hel p y ou, r atherthan s om ethi ng thatw oul d harm y ou. ” D el B uono and hi s couns el di d notcont es tthi s . A l l of thes e s t at ement s w er e i n t he cont extof the s ent ence col l oquyand w er e partof the C our t ’ s concl us i ons on t he char act er i s t i cs of D el B uono. I n s hor t , w e bel i eve the C our tadequa t el yaddr es s ed the § 3553( a) fac t or s and “s et forth en ou gh t o sat i sfy[us] that [s ]he has con si dered t he p art i es’ argum ents and has a r eas oned bas i s forexer ci s i ng [her ] ow n l egal deci s i onm aki ng author i t y . ” Jones , 566 F. 3d a t 3 6 6 (c itatio n s o m itt e d ). A f ter n o tin g th e se f

a c to rs, th e C o u rt im p o se d a se n ten c e w ith in t he G uidel i nes range o f 18 8– 23 5 m on t hs. I f the s ent ence “fa l l s w i t hi n t he br oad r ange of pos s i bl e s ent ence s thatcan be c o n s id e re d re a s o n a b le in lig h t o f th e § 3 5 5 3 (a ) f

a c to rs ,” w e a f

f ir m . Jones , 566 F. 3d at8

3 6 6 (c itatio n o m itt e d ). H e re , the D istric t C o u rt se n ten c e d D e lB u o n o to a su b sta n tiv e ly r e a s o n a b l e t e r m o f

2 3 0 mo n t h s ’ i mp r i s o n me n t . W e th u s a f f i r m.