Submitted: November 17, 2017
from United States District Court for the District of
Nebraska - Omaha
BENTON, SHEPHERD, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
BENTON, Circuit Judge.
Christopher Baskin appeals his consecutive sentences for
witness tampering and drug trafficking. Having jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
convicted Baskin of witness tampering. He later pled guilty
to related drug trafficking, agreeing to a sentence of 120
months. The 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement said: "The
parties have no agreement regarding whether the sentence in
[the drug-trafficking case] will be concurrent with or
consecutive to the sentence in [the witness-tampering
case]." He "knowingly and expressly waive[d] any
and all rights to appeal the . . . conviction and
sentence" in both cases except, as applicable, whether
the two sentences could run consecutively.
consolidated hearing, the district court sentenced Baskin
to 120 months for drug trafficking, and a consecutive 48
months for witness tampering. He appeals the sentences,
arguing (1) they should run concurrently, and (2) the
government violated the plea agreement by advocating
believes the district court erred in imposing consecutive
sentences. This court reviews the "decision to impose a
consecutive or concurrent sentence for reasonableness."
United States v. Bryant, 606 F.3d 912, 920 (8th Cir.
2010). "A review for reasonableness is 'akin' to
the 'abuse-of-discretion' standard."
Id., quoting United States v. Mathis, 451
F.3d 939, 941 (8th Cir. 2006).
§ 5G1.2 "specifies the procedure for determining
the specific sentence to be formally imposed" where, as
here, a defendant is sentenced on "multiple counts of
conviction . . . contained in different indictments . . . for
which sentences are to be imposed at the same time or in a
consolidated proceeding." U.S.S.G. § 5G1.2
cmt. n.1. It says:
(b) For all counts not covered by subsection (a), the court
shall determine the total punishment and shall impose that
total punishment on each such count, except to the extent
otherwise required by law.
(c) If the sentence imposed on the count carrying the highest
statutory maximum is adequate to achieve the total
punishment, then the sentences on all counts shall run
concurrently, except to the extent otherwise required by law.
(d) If the sentence imposed on the count carrying the highest
statutory maximum is less than the total punishment, then the
sentence imposed on one or more of the other counts shall run
consecutively, but only to the extent necessary to produce a
combined sentence equal to the total punishment. In all other
respects, sentences on ...