United States v. Olson
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 783
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Olson pled guilty to possession of materials involving exploitation of minors based on images found during a state investigation of his abuse of his stepdaughter.
- Federal agents discovered over 2,000 images and nine videos depicting minors in sexually explicit conduct on Olson's computer.
- Olson was also convicted in state court of continuous sexual abuse of a child and sentenced to 60 years, with half suspended.
- At federal sentencing, Olson described his addiction to child pornography and sought treatment, while the district court declined the presentence report’s 5-level enhancement for a pattern of activity.
- The district court sentenced Olson to 108 months consecutive to his state sentence, plus lifetime supervised release with a special condition prohibiting possession of sexually explicit material.
- Tapia v. United States was decided after Olson's sentencing; the court then vacated and remanded for resentencing to address potential Tapia error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tapia error in consecutive sentence to obtain rehabilitation | Olson: sentence length was chosen to enable treatment. | United States: no improper purpose shown; record unclear. | Remanded for resentencing to clarify Tapia issue. |
| Constitutionality and scope of the special condition prohibiting pornographic material | Olson: condition is overbroad and unwarranted. | United States: condition reasonably relates to offense and deterrence. | Condition upheld as permissible; remand possible to reimpose with clarity. |
| Effect of not applying the five-level enhancement on sentencing | Olson: the decision to forego the enhancement affected the guideline range and concurrency presumption. | United States: district court's reasoning permissible and within discretion. | Remand for clarity on trial court's intent and calculation post-Tapia. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382 (2011) (cannot lengthen sentence to promote rehabilitation)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (establishes sentencing framework and procedure under Gall)
- United States v. Blackmon, 662 F.3d 981 (8th Cir. 2011) (no plain Tapia error where rehabilitation discussed but not used to lengthen sentence)
- United States v. Werlein, 664 F.3d 1143 (8th Cir. 2011) (no plain Tapia error where no improper intent shown)
- United States v. Kubeczko, 660 F.3d 260 (7th Cir. 2011) (remand when record unclear on Tapia error)