Court Opinion

ID: 9905741
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-30 01:02:39.203033+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:52.325357
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10295   Document: 00516982439   Page: 1   Date Filed: 11/29/2023

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                           ____________
                                                          United States Court of Appeals
                                                                   Fifth Circuit
                            No. 23-10295
                          Summary Calendar                       FILED
                          ____________                   November 29, 2023
                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                     Clerk

                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                versus

   Arkon Caldwell,

                                               Defendant—Appellant,

                        consolidated with
                          _____________

                            No. 23-10296
                          _____________

   United States of America,

                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                versus

   Arkon Christopher Caldwell,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
Case: 23-10295       Document: 00516982439             Page: 2      Date Filed: 11/29/2023

                                        No. 23-10295
                                      c/w No. 23-10296

                    ______________________________

                    Appeals from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                     USDC Nos. 2:22-CR-96-1, 2:22-CR-103-1
                    ______________________________

   Before Jones, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Arkon Caldwell pleaded guilty to failing to register as a sex offender.
   For this conviction, the district court sentenced him to 16 months of
   imprisonment, to be followed by 10 years of supervised release. It also
   imposed a six-month term of imprisonment upon revocation of a previously
   imposed term of supervised release.
          Caldwell has failed to brief, and thus abandoned, any argument
   regarding the revocation case. See United States v. Buendia, 73 F.4th 336, 338
   n.1 (5th Cir. 2023), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Oct. 10, 2023) (No. 23-5788).
   However, Caldwell challenges his sentence for failure to register as a sex
   offender on several grounds.
          First, he argues that the district court plainly erred in failing to
   adequately explain its imposition of an above-guidelines term of supervised
   release. Contrary to Caldwell’s arguments, the record reflects that the
   district court had the correct guidelines range in mind at sentencing but
   intended to impose an upward variance on the term of supervised release;
   thus, Caldwell’s arguments fail to establish an effect on his substantial rights.
   See United States v. Escalante-Reyes, 689 F.3d 415, 424 (5th Cir. 2012) (en
   banc); see also Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).

          _____________________
          *
              Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
   should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set
   forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

                                              2
Case: 23-10295      Document: 00516982439         Page: 3    Date Filed: 11/29/2023

                                    No. 23-10295
                                  c/w No. 23-10296

          Next, Caldwell challenges the conditions of his supervised release
   requiring mental-health and sex-offender treatment. Both conditions are
   reasonably related to the relevant statutory factors and are supported by the
   record, particularly Caldwell’s (1) prior mental-health diagnosis and use of
   medication and (2) prior child sex offense and his repeated attempts in the
   instant case to defy the registration requirement, which, we have recognized,
   implicate a greater likelihood of recidivism. See United States v. Miller,
   665 F.3d 114, 126 (5th Cir. 2011); United States v. Bree, 927 F.3d 856, 860-61
   (5th Cir. 2019); United States v. Fields, 777 F.3d 799, 803-04 (5th Cir. 2015).
   We reject Caldwell’s argument, raised for the first time on appeal, that the
   sex-offender-treatment condition is not narrowly tailored, as the district
   court’s chief concern in imposing that condition was Caldwell’s risk of
   recidivism, not the need for polygraph testing. See Miller, 665 F.3d at 134;
   Fields, 777 F.3d at 804.
          AFFIRMED.

                                          3