Opinion ID: 854789
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Special Condition of Probation.

Text: Relying on our decisions in United States v. Prendergast, 979 F.2d 1289 (8th Cir. 1992), and United States v. Bass, 121 F.3d 1218 (8th Cir. 1997), Robertson argues that the district court abused its discretion when it imposed, as a special condition of her probation, that she “totally abstain from the use of alcohol [and] submit to drug/alcohol screening at the direction of the U.S. Probation Officer to verify compliance.” This contention is without merit. First, unlike Prendergast and Bass, there is ample evidence to support a total alcohol ban in this case. Robertson has three alcohol-related offenses, including two recent offenses -- public intoxication in January 2009 and driving under the influence in October 2010 when, according to police reports, her grandchildren were in the car she was driving. We have repeatedly affirmed total bans on alcohol consumption when either the defendant’s history and characteristics or the crime of conviction supported the restriction. See United States v. Forde, 664 F.3d 1219, 1222-23 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 2789 (2012). Second, the district court did not fail to make an individualized inquiry as to the propriety of the prohibition, which distinguishes the record in this case from United States v. Wisecarver, 644 F.3d 764, 775-76 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 533 (2011). When Robertson objected to the total ban at sentencing, the court responded by specifically highlighting her 2009 and 2010 alcohol-related convictions. Third, we reject Robertson’s contention that her conditions of probation are ambiguous; the district court made clear at sentencing that the unambiguous, more restrictive special condition controls the less restrictive standard condition prohibiting excessive use of alcohol. Finally, we consider it significant that the district court, varying downward from the advisory range, sentenced Robertson to 36 months probation, with the first six months in home confinement at her home on the Spirit Lake Reservation. Tribal law prohibits alcohol consumption by Indians within the Reservation boundaries. It is reasonable to require -12- Robertson to comply with tribal law while confined to her home as a more lenient alternative to incarceration. Cf. U.S.S.G. § 5F1.2, comment. (n.2). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________ -13-