934 F.3d 804
8th Cir.2019Background
- Defendant Chance Garrett Williams pled guilty to two counts of attempted sexual exploitation of a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and (e).
- Guidelines calculation: total offense level 43, CHC I, advisory Guidelines recommended life (720 months total); statutory maximum 30 years per count (60 years total).
- Plea agreement included an appellate-waiver of "any non‑jurisdictional issues" but carved out appeals for upward departures/variances exceeding a "30 year recommendation;" language and colloquy were ambiguous.
- District court sentenced Williams to consecutive 360‑month terms on each count (720 months total / 60 years), applying the Guidelines calculation and citing seriousness, deterrence, and protection of society.
- Williams appealed arguing (1) the sentences should have run concurrently, and (2) the sentence is substantively unreasonable and creates unwarranted disparity; government argued the plea waiver foreclosed appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of appellate waiver | Waiver ambiguous and magistrate's colloquy failed to ensure voluntary, knowing waiver; therefore appeal preserved | Waiver in plea agreement bars this appeal | Waiver ambiguous and colloquy unclear; waiver not enforced; appeal allowed |
| Consecutive vs concurrent sentences | Consecutive imposition was error; sentences should run concurrently | District court followed Guidelines §5G1.2 and considered §3553(a); consecutive sentences proper | No plain error: court correctly calculated "total punishment," applied §5G1.2, and adequately considered §3553(a) |
| Substantive reasonableness / unwarranted disparity | Within‑Guidelines 60‑year sentence is substantively unreasonable and disparate | Within‑Guidelines sentences are presumptively reasonable; district court made individualized §3553(a) findings | No abuse of discretion: sentence reasonable, court weighed proper factors and distinguished comparator cases |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2003) (defendant may waive appellate rights; waiver enforceability standards)
- United States v. McIntosh, 492 F.3d 956 (8th Cir. 2007) (government must prove appeal falls clearly within waiver scope)
- Booker v. United States, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (Guidelines advisory; courts must consider them but may vary sentence)
- United States v. Rutherford, 599 F.3d 817 (8th Cir. 2010) (district court must determine Guidelines range and consider §3553(a) when choosing concurrent vs consecutive)
- United States v. Richart, 662 F.3d 1037 (8th Cir. 2011) (definition of "total punishment" under Guidelines §5G1.2)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (standard of review for substantive reasonableness of sentencing)