Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher GUERRA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-05-04
Citations: 856 F.3d 368
Docket Number: No. 16-41030 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher GUERRA, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 856
Pages: 368–370

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher GUERRA, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-41030 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
FILED May 4, 2017
Jimmy Eric Pardue, Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Kathryn Shephard, H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge:
Defendant-Appellant Christopher Guerra pled guilty to illegally transporting an undocumented alien within the United States and was sentenced, within the guidelines, to 41 months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release. As a special condition of his supervised release, the district court ordered Guerra to participate in mental health and drug treatment programs "as deemed necessary and approved by the probation officer." On appeal, Guerra contends that such language impermissibly delegated to the probation officer the court's responsibility to determine whether he must participate in mental health and drug treatment. Because Guerra did not object to the challenged release conditions, we review them for plain error. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009).
The imposition of supervised release conditions and terms "is a core judicial function that may not be delegated." United States v. Franklin, 838 F.3d 564, 567-68 (5th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). However, providing appropriate treatment for prisoners with known mental problems is also a core duty of judges. The PSR reflects that Guerra reported a history of mental health treatment for "depression, anxiety, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)" as well as his past use of alcohol, marijuana, and crack cocaine. The PSR also revealed past diagnoses of PTSD and Antisocial Personality Disorder. Id. At sentencing, Guerra's counsel likewise pointed out his "mental health issues." Adopting the PSR, the district court imposed two relevant special conditions on Guerra's supervised release. First, the court "order[ed] that [Guerra] participate in a drug and|7]or alcohol treatment program as deemed necessary and approved by the probation officer." Id. Second, the court "impose[d] a mental health condition, which requires [Guerra] to participate in a mental health program as deemed necessary and approved by the probation officer."
Clearly, based on this history and defense counsel's representations to the court, the judge intended that treatment be mandatory and left only the details to the probation officer. Lest there be any doubt, we AFFIRM the sentence as MODIFIED—mental health treatment including substance abuse is imposed, details of treatment to be supervised by the probation office.
AFFIRMED as Modified.