United States v. Diaz-Arroyo
797 F.3d 125
| 1st Cir. | 2015Background
- Diaz-Arroyo pleaded guilty to felon in possession of a firearm under an open plea agreement guiding sentencing.
- January 2014: police observed defendant with a firearm in a public housing area, attempted to flee, and was arrested; marijuana and a loaded Glock with ammunition were found.
- PSI calculated base offense level 14, added for a stolen firearm, and reduced for timely acceptance, yielding total level 13; criminal history category II based on prior weapons convictions and probation history.
- PSI noted two non-convicted past incidents later dismissed (2012 false documents/pointing a firearm; 2014 murder/attempted murder); dismissals were explained but the PSI did not state reasons.
- District court adopted the PSI’s calculations, sentenced Diaz-Arroyo to 48 months’ imprisonment and 3 years’ supervised release, and imposed electronic-monitoring conditions including a telephone line without a modem.
- Written judgment’s supervised-release language ambiguously suggested no internet access restriction; Diaz-Arroyo timely appealed on this ground
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the waiver of appeal applies to the sentence. | Diaz-Arroyo argues waiver does not bar review of the sentence. | N/A | Waiver does not apply; sentence falls outside the Agreement’s Sentence Recommendations. |
| Whether the sentence is substantively reasonable. | Sentence premised on deterrence factors tied to Puerto Rico crime and dismissed charges. | Sentence supported by deterrence and gravity given CHC and prior conduct. | Sentence within the universe of reasonable outcomes; not an abuse of discretion. |
| Whether the supervised-release condition about internet use was ambiguous in the written judgment. | Condition language implied a prohibition on internet access. | N/A | Remand to correct judgment to clarify no internet prohibition. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Rivera-González, 776 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2015) (guidance on why waiver issues and sentencing factors matter; substantive reasonableness framework)
- United States v. Flores-Machicote, 706 F.3d 16 (1st Cir. 2013) (two-part test for substantive reasonableness; deterrence as key factor)
- United States v. Martin, 520 F.3d 87 (1st Cir. 2008) (sentence is a judgment call within a universe of reasonable sentences)
- United States v. Narváez-Soto, 773 F.3d 282 (1st Cir. 2014) (deterrence and community considerations may inform sentencing)
- United States v. Lozada-Aponte, 689 F.3d 791 (1st Cir. 2012) (prior unconvicted conduct can illuminate pattern of unlawful behavior for deterrence)