United States v. Justin Werle
706 F. App'x 397
9th Cir.2017Background
- Justin Curtis Werle pled guilty to: (1) unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and (2) possession of an unregistered firearm (26 U.S.C. § 5861(d)).
- District court originally imposed a 180‑month total sentence; after appeal the court imposed a 140‑month total sentence comprised of consecutive terms to reach that total.
- The district judge explained the sentence with reference to the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, emphasizing Werle’s criminal history and deterrence/public‑safety purposes.
- Werle challenged the district court’s use of consecutive sentences procedurally and substantively, arguing vindictiveness and double punishment for the same offense.
- The court also noted Werle’s separate argument that prior Washington felony harassment convictions were crimes of violence (addressed in a separate per curiam opinion).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court inadequately explained consecutive sentence selection | Werle argued the court failed to adequately explain imposing consecutive terms | Government: judge sufficiently explained total 140‑month sentence and need for consecutive terms to achieve that total | Affirmed — judge adequately explained sentence under Carty and §3553(a) factors |
| Whether resentencing after appeal was vindictive | Werle claimed consecutive sentences after appeal punished him for appealing | Government: net sentence decreased (180 → 140), so no presumption of vindictiveness; consecutive terms used only to reach chosen total | Affirmed — no vindictiveness; no presumption where punishment decreased (Alabama v. Smith; Hagler) |
| Whether convictions punished the same offense (double punishment) | Werle argued two counts punished same conduct | Government: counts require different elements (felon status vs. unregistered firearm) | Affirmed — Blockburger test satisfied; separate offenses |
| Whether prior state convictions are crimes of violence (sentence enhancement) | Werle contended his Washington felony harassment convictions are not crimes of violence | Government urged enhancement based on convictions; court resolved in separate per curiam opinion | Not resolved in this disposition; addressed separately (contemporaneous per curiam opinion) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2008) (district judge must adequately explain chosen sentence under §3553(a))
- Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S. 794 (1989) (vindictive sentencing after appeal violates due process when there is a net increase in punishment)
- United States v. Hagler, 709 F.2d 578 (9th Cir. 1983) (no presumption of vindictiveness absent net increase in sentence)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (requires‑different‑elements test for double punishment)