U.S. v. White

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 20-month term of incarceration after finding that defendant had violated terms of his supervised release on conviction for failing to register as sex offender, where defendant had pleaded guilty to state charges of credit-card fraud and theft. Instant sentence was below applicable guideline range, and although probation officer committed misconduct at instant sentencing hearing by making unprofessional, inflammatory and unwarranted statements about defendant’s mental state that exceeded bounds of probation officer’s role as neutral information officer, any misinformation was not of constitutional magnitude, and Dist. Ct. adequately justified basis for need for instant incarceration based on defendant's state-court convictions, as well as need for instant sentence to be served consecutively to state-court sentence, without any additional post-incarceration supervision due to defendant’s poor adaptation to supervision.