Caldwell
United States v. Caldwell
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
William Blake Caldwell appeals his above-Guidelines sentence. We affirm.
The above-guidelines sentence is both a departure and a variance, because it was both justified “under the framework set out in the Guidelines” and “justified under the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a).” Irizarry v. United States, 553 U.S.-,-, 128 S.Ct. 2198, 2202-03 , 171 L.Ed.2d 28 (2008). The district court committed plain error in failing *670 to notify Caldwell of its intention to depart from the guidelines. Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(h); United States v. Evans-MaHinez, 530 F.3d 1164, 1168 (9th Cir.2008). That error was harmless, though, because the district court did not commit plain error in failing to notify Caldwell of its intent to impose a sentence at variance with the guidelines. United States v. Orlando, 553 F.3d 1235, 1237-38 (9th Cir.2009).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a 60-month sentence. United States v. Cherer, 513 F.3d 1150, 1159-60 (9th Cir.2008). Caldwell had a violent history, suffered from mental disorders, and stalked K.B. for over a decade, sending her threatening letters and driving with a gun to where she lived. He even sent…