Court Opinion

ID: 9398428
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-31 14:01:09.432414+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:33.747375
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 21-14307       Document: 35-1    Date Filed: 05/31/2023   Page: 1 of 9

                                                    [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                     In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eleventh Circuit

                             ____________________

                                  No. 21-14307
                             Non-Argument Calendar
                             ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                        Plaintiff-Appellee,
       versus
       FRED LEE WHITE, III,
       a.k.a. Trey White,
                                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                             ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Middle District of Florida
                  D.C. Docket No. 6:20-cr-00153-PGB-EJK-1
USCA11 Case: 21-14307     Document: 35-1     Date Filed: 05/31/2023   Page: 2 of 9

       2                     Opinion of the Court                21-14307

                           ____________________

       Before ROSENBAUM, LAGOA, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Fred Lee White III appeals his 156-month sentence for two
       counts of receipt of child pornography, a 41-month upward vari-
       ance from the guideline range, as substantively unreasonable. He
       argues that the guideline range properly accounted for his crimi-
       nal history, the offense characteristics, his cooperation, and his
       personal history. He argues in disregarding the guideline range,
       the District Court improperly focused on his criminal history and
       did not provide a sufficiently compelling justification for the up-
       ward variance. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
                                       I.
             White was indicted on seven counts of receiving material
       containing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C.
       §§ 2252A(a)(2) and (b)(1) and one count of possessing material
       containing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C.
       §§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) and (b)(2).
             In a plea agreement, White pled guilty to Counts Four and
       Six of receiving material containing child pornography. The
       agreement recognized that each of the two counts carries a min-
       imum term of imprisonment of five years and a maximum term
       of imprisonment of twenty years. Each count also carries a max-
       imum fine of $250,000, a term of supervised release between five
       years and life, a special assessment of $100, and possible restitu-
USCA11 Case: 21-14307     Document: 35-1     Date Filed: 05/31/2023    Page: 3 of 9

       21-14307               Opinion of the Court                       3

       tion. The plea agreement also called for the dismissal of the re-
       maining counts in the indictment. The Court accepted White’s
       plea agreement at a Change of Plea Hearing.
              Before White’s sentencing hearing, a probation officer pre-
       pared a presentence investigation report (“PSR”). The PSR con-
       tained the following information about White’s criminal history.
              In April 2004, White was arrested for Resisting Arrest
       Without Violence after becoming verbally abusive and kicking
       Nassau County Sheriff’s deputies when they conducted a traffic
       stop on White’s vehicle. He was sentenced to 12 months’ proba-
       tion in Florida state court, but probation was terminated in No-
       vember of the same year.
             In August 2005, White was arrested for Driving Under Sus-
       pension. He was fined in South Carolina state court.
              In November 2005, White was arrested for Disturbing
       School after he “loitered around the premises of [an elementary
       school,] drove around the parking lot[,] and when approached by
       a teacher[,] drove away in excessive speeds while school children
       were present.” After pleading guilty in South Carolina state
       court, he was sentenced to ten days in jail or a $150 fine.
              In March 2006, White was arrested for Indecent Exposure
       after he exposed his penis to a ten-year-old girl. He pled guilty in
       South Carolina state court and was sentenced to 3 years of proba-
       tion and sex offender counseling.
USCA11 Case: 21-14307    Document: 35-1     Date Filed: 05/31/2023   Page: 4 of 9

       4                     Opinion of the Court               21-14307

              In January 2013, White was arrested for Fleeing or At-
       tempting to Elude a Police Officer when he refused to stop for an
       attempted vehicle stop and fled in excess of 20 miles per hour
       above the posted speed limit. He was sentenced in Georgia state
       court to a fine and five years of probation, which was terminated
       in 2021.
              In November 2015, while still on probation, White was ar-
       rested for Battery. Three victims—two adult women and the son
       of one of the women—attempted to get White away from the
       vehicle belonging to one of the victims. White choked both
       women, threatened to kill one of them, and ultimately picked one
       of the victims off the ground by the neck and slammed her on the
       ground before all three victims were able to flee to the mother
       victim’s apartment. White tried to enter the apartment, banging
       on a window and the door, and was uncooperative when police
       ultimately arrived. White pled nolo contendere in Florida state
       court, was adjudicated guilty, and, in June 2016, was sentenced to
       twelve months’ probation and ten days on a work farm. This
       probation was terminated early in September of the next year.
              On February 20, 2020, and after receiving a tip that an IP
       address associated with White was used to download an image of
       child pornography, agents with the Brevard County Sheriff’s Of-
       fice met with White. He denied downloading any child pornog-
       raphy.
             In May 2020—while still on probation—White was arrested
       for Lewd or Lascivious Exhibition after being caught masturbat-
USCA11 Case: 21-14307     Document: 35-1     Date Filed: 05/31/2023    Page: 5 of 9

       21-14307               Opinion of the Court                       5

       ing outside of his camper and in full view of a 10-year-old girl who
       was standing right outside her yard. Pleading nolo contendere in
       Florida state court, White was sentenced on March 5, 2021, to 42
       months in Florida Department of Corrections with 305 days cred-
       it for time served.
               Two days after his arrest, a neighbor, while looking for
       keys, spotted a tablet on the ground next to White’s truck. The
       tablet being unlocked, the neighbor looked through the photo
       gallery and saw multiple images of what appeared to be child
       pornography. The neighbor then gave the tablet to the mother of
       the 10-year-old neighbor, who turned it in to the police. These
       images formed the basis for the sentence currently before us.
              The PSR calculated a total offense level of 26 and a criminal
       history category of IV, resulting in a guideline imprisonment
       range of 92 to 115 months. The District Court sentenced White
       to 156 months imprisonment for each of the two counts to run
       concurrently with each other, but consecutively to the state term
       of imprisonment he is currently serving pursuant to his Florida
       state conviction. The Court also sentenced White to fifteen years
       of supervised release to commence after his term of imprison-
       ment.
             At the sentencing hearing, the Court acknowledged the 18
       U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. In deciding to sentence
       White above the guideline range, the Court discussed how the
       Brevard County Sheriff’s Office interviewed White three months
       before his tablet was found, and that he denied being involved in
USCA11 Case: 21-14307     Document: 35-1      Date Filed: 05/31/2023    Page: 6 of 9

       6                      Opinion of the Court                21-14307

       the use of child pornography. The Court also discussed how
       young the children in the videos found on White’s computer
       were, and the pattern formed by White’s criminal record, specifi-
       cally including the facts that led to his battery conviction. The
       Court considered that White had been placed on probation four
       times over a period of 17 years—at times for other sexual conduct
       involving minors—and that he continued to exhibit “a very high
       level [of] disrespect for authority, violence towards women, abuse
       of children, and a lack of being amenable to probation or other
       corrective care.” Finally, the Court discussed White’s privileged
       upbringing and that it did not doubt White was compassionate
       and caring to his family, but that did not necessarily mean he was
       not a danger to society at large.
                                        II.
               We review a sentence under the abuse of discretion stand-
       ard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S. Ct. 586,
       597 (2007). We decide whether a sentence is substantively unrea-
       sonable by considering the totality of the circumstances of the
       case and the purposes of a sentence as expressed in the 18 U.S.C.
       § 3553(a) factors. United States v. Trailer, 827 F.3d 933, 936 (11th
       Cir. 2016) (per curiam). We recognize that a sentence must be
       sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to satisfy the factors
       listed in § 3553(a)(2): the need of the sentence to reflect the seri-
       ousness of the offense and to provide punishment, general deter-
       rence, and specific deterrence—in other words, protecting the
       public from the defendant’s future conduct. See 18 U.S.C.
       § 3553(a)(2)(A)–(C). In arriving at a sentence, the court need not
USCA11 Case: 21-14307     Document: 35-1      Date Filed: 05/31/2023    Page: 7 of 9

       21-14307               Opinion of the Court                        7

       discuss each of the § 3553(a) factors, but the record must reflect
       that it did consider them. United States v. Ghertler, 605 F.3d 1256,
       1262 (11th Cir. 2010). The weight the court gives a § 3553(a) fac-
       tor is a matter committed to its sound discretion. United States v.
       Williams, 526 F.3d 1312, 1322 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam). A sen-
       tence is substantively unreasonable if we are left with the “defi-
       nite and firm conviction that the district court committed a clear
       error of judgment in weighing the § 3553(a) factors.” United States
       v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160, 1190 (11th Cir. 2010) (en banc) (quoting
       United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179, 1191 (11th Cir. 2008)).
               If a district court determines that a sentence outside the
       guideline range is appropriate, “it must consider the extent of the
       deviation and ensure that the justification is sufficiently compel-
       ling to support the degree of the variance.” United States v. Over-
       street, 713 F.3d 627, 636 (11th Cir. 2013) (quotation marks omit-
       ted) (quoting Williams 526 at 1322). The district court’s imposi-
       tion of a sentence well below the statutory maximum penalty is
       an indicator of reasonableness. United States v. Croteau, 819 F.3d
       1293, 1310 (11th Cir. 2016). The district court may also “consider
       facts that were taken into account when formulating the guideline
       range for the sake of a variance.” United States v. Dougherty, 754
       F.3d 1353, 1362 (11th Cir. 2014).
              We have stated that child sex crimes are among the worst
       criminal offenses and have upheld lengthy sentences in these cas-
       es as substantively reasonable. United States v. Sarras, 575 F.3d
       1191, 1220–21 (11th Cir. 2009); see also United States v. Turner, 626
USCA11 Case: 21-14307     Document: 35-1      Date Filed: 05/31/2023    Page: 8 of 9

       8                      Opinion of the Court                21-14307

       F.3d 566, 574 (11th Cir. 2010) (upholding a 90-month upward var-
       iance for possession of child pornography because possessing
       child pornography contributes to the victimization of children
       and Turner posed a risk to the public).
              Here, the District Court did not abuse its discretion in vary-
       ing White’s term of imprisonment above the guideline range.
       First, White faced a maximum term of imprisonment of forty
       years, which points to the reasonableness of a 156-month sen-
       tence.
               Further, the Court explained at the sentencing hearing that
       the criminal history category of IV provided by the PSR does not
       “adequately reflect[] how serious [White’s] conduct is and what
       danger [he] present[s] to society” and that “it doesn’t address the
       pattern of behavior . . . that’s accelerated over time.” See United
       States v. Rosales-Bruno, 789 F.3d 1249, 1264 (11th Cir. 2015) (noting
       that even though properly calculated guideline ranges incorporate
       a defendant’s criminal history, a district court may properly find
       that the guideline range does not account for the nature of the
       prior offenses or the continuous pattern of criminal behavior).
       This was not an abuse of discretion. White’s criminal history in-
       dicates that he has not confined his interest in children to the vir-
       tual realm. He has been convicted of disturbing school for loiter-
       ing around an elementary school—where he further endangered
       children by fleeing at high rates of speed—and has twice been
       convicted for exposing his genitalia to 10-year-old girls, and those
       incidents were 14 years apart. White has also faced probation
USCA11 Case: 21-14307    Document: 35-1     Date Filed: 05/31/2023   Page: 9 of 9

       21-14307              Opinion of the Court                      9

       multiple times, as well as court-mandated sex offender counsel-
       ing, and yet the pattern has continued. For these reasons, we
       cannot say that the District Court abused its discretion in deter-
       mining that an upward variance was justified.
             AFFIRMED.