From U.S. v. Melzer, determined final week by Second Circuit Judges Susan Carney, Joseph Bianco, and William Nardini:
Defendant-Appellant Ethan Phelan Melzer appeals from the district courtroom’s judgment, following his responsible plea, to: (1) trying to homicide U.S. service members, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and a couple of; (2) offering and trying to supply materials help to terrorists, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2339A and a couple of; and (3) illegally transmitting nationwide protection info, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 793(d) and a couple of. The district courtroom sentenced Melzer principally to a time period of 540 months’ imprisonment, adopted by supervised launch for a time period of three years.
Melzer’s sole argument on enchantment is that the district courtroom procedurally erred at sentencing as a result of its “reference to Melzer’s dislike of ‘Judeo and Christian values’ created the looks that the size of the sentence the courtroom imposed was affected by a constitutionally impermissible consideration.” Melzer didn’t object to the district courtroom’s feedback throughout the sentencing, and we usually assessment claims of procedural unreasonableness underneath the plain error customary if no objection was raised within the district courtroom. To find out whether or not error occurred, we assessment de novo whether or not the district courtroom improperly thought of a constitutionally impermissible consider its sentencing….
In 2018, Melzer enlisted in the US Military, and, after finishing primary coaching, he was deployed to a navy advanced in Italy. Throughout his project in Italy, Melzer plotted the homicide of his fellow servicemembers, as a part of his membership within the Order of the 9 Angels (“O9A”), which is a violent, white supremacist, neo-Nazi, Satanist, pro-jihadist group. In early Could 2020, the Military reassigned Melzer to a platoon scheduled for a labeled international deployment.
On or about Could 23, 2020, in an O9A group chat on Telegram, Melzer wrote a sequence of messages, figuring out himself as a U.S. servicemember stationed in Italy who was happening a deployment to a different location and proposing that he and different members of O9A coordinate a jihadist assault on his platoon at that location. On Could 25, 2020, he revealed extremely delicate details about the upcoming deployment to a co-conspirator through Telegram and mentioned how an assault on the platoon might be efficiently carried out.
After Melzer exchanged different Telegram messages with co-conspirators relating to the deliberate assault on the platoon, navy investigators took him into custody on Could 30, 2020, as his platoon waited to board buses to the airport in Italy en path to their new deployment location. On Melzer’s telephone, investigators discovered a message that Melzer had drafted, however not but despatched, through which he was responding to further questions from a co-conspirator in an effort to affirm the depth of his ideological dedication to O9A.
At sentencing, in explaining the explanations for the 540-month sentence underneath the elements set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the district courtroom, inter alia, described the seriousness of Melzer’s offense conduct, together with his motivation to facilitate a lethal assault on his unit to additional the violent goals of the O9A:
Mr. Melzer’s crimes have been repugnant. He betrayed the US of America. He betrayed the US navy. He focused for homicide his fellow troopers. He labored to assist jihadist terrorists. All so he may obtain his nihilist objective of undermining Judeo-Christian values and rupturing civilized society. A lot has been stated right here in regards to the group that Mr. Melzer joined …. [I]t is a white nationalist, neo-Nazi, satanist, pro-jihadist group that promotes the usage of excessive violence to speed up and trigger the demise of western civilization. In its view, as embraced by Mr. Melzer, these values maintain us again from the state of nature and are holding us again from what it and Mr. Melzer views because the pure order – chaos. The group and Mr. Melzer opposed these Judeo and Christian values as a result of they’re good for civilization. His crimes have been dedicated in an effort to destroy civilization, to carry us again to a state of nature.
The district courtroom’s description of the O9A’s ideology and goals was derived from the factual recitation within the Pre-Sentence Report, to which Melzer didn’t object.
On enchantment, Melzer contends that re-sentencing is warranted as a result of these feedback by the district courtroom about O9A “would allow an affordable observer to conclude that the district courtroom’s sentence on this case was affected by the defendant’s hostility towards ‘Judeo and Christian values’—values that, within the courtroom’s view, are good for civilization.” We disagree.
Sentencing courts usually have discretion to “conduct an inquiry broad in scope, largely limitless both as to the form of info they might think about, or the supply from which it might come.” Furthermore, though “[t]he First Modification forbids the uncabined reliance on a defendant’s ‘summary beliefs’ at sentencing,” a sentencing choose could think about “proof of beliefs or associational actions, as long as they’re related to show, for instance, motive or aggravating circumstances, as an instance future dangerousness, or to rebut mitigating proof.” …
“The First Modification doesn’t erect a per se barrier to the admission at sentencing of proof relating to the defendant’s beliefs or associational exercise. A sentencing courtroom could think about such proof as long as it’s related to the problems concerned within the sentencing continuing. Amongst different potential makes use of, a selected piece of proof could also be related to indicate motive, analyze a statutory aggravating issue, illustrate future dangerousness or potential recidivism, or rebut mitigating proof that the defendant proffers.” … On this context, we’ll vacate the sentence the place there may be “a adequate threat {that a} cheap observer, listening to or studying the quoted remarks, would possibly infer, nonetheless incorrectly,” {that a} defendant’s protected traits or non secular beliefs “performed a task in figuring out [the defendant’s] sentence.”
Right here, we conclude that the district courtroom didn’t sentence Melzer primarily based on any constitutionally-protected beliefs, nor may an affordable observer consider in any other case primarily based on the district courtroom’s feedback. As a substitute, it’s clear from the document that the district courtroom briefly referenced O9A’s ideology, together with its opposition to Judeo-Chris[tian] values, in reference to the courtroom’s consideration of Melzer’s motive for the offense conduct, as permitted in its analysis of the Part 3553(a) elements, together with on the problem of future dangerousness.
Though Melzer asserts that the district courtroom “made a value-judgment about [Judeo and Christian] values, saying they have been ‘good for civilization,'” we’re unpersuaded. As summarized above, the district courtroom’s “good for civilization” reference was made within the context of describing Melzer’s and the O9A’s views of these values to clarify why, in line with them, these values needed to be defeated by violent conduct if their objective of chaos was to be achieved. Thus, that passing reference by no means indicated the district courtroom’s personal private worth judgments in imposing its sentence. See App’x at 129 (stating that “[i]n its [i.e., O9A’s] view, as embraced by Mr. Melzer, these values maintain us again from the state of nature and are holding us again from what it and Mr. Melzer views because the pure order—chaos” (emphasis added)); see additionally id. (“The group and Mr. Melzer opposed these Judeo and Christian values as a result of they’re good for civilization,” and “[h]is crimes have been dedicated in an effort to destroy civilization, to carry us again to a state of nature.” (emphasis added)).
Certainly, the district courtroom’s feedback dispelled any notion that it was sentencing Melzer for his ideology. Particularly, at sentencing, the federal government famous: “To be completely clear, the defendant isn’t be[ing] sentenced for his beliefs, his worldview, and even his advocacy for it.” The district courtroom then emphasised this level by explaining: “As counsel for the US described, [Melzer] isn’t charged right here along with his ideology. His crime started after his unit was transferred to Italy.” In doing so, the district courtroom made clear that Melzer was not being sentenced primarily based on any beliefs or ideologies held previous to his deployment to Italy, however relatively for his felony conduct in Italy that was motivated by these beliefs and ideologies, together with transmitting nationwide protection info, offering help to terrorists, and trying to kill his fellow troopers. See, e.g., App’x at 131 (“Mr. Melzer supplied nationwide protection info to others intending that it’s used to homicide the members of his platoon by the jihadi fighters. Mr. Melzer strategized about one of the best methods to assault his unit, and to kill the 40 or so service individuals in it.”)….
Matthew J.C. Hellman, Samuel Adelsberg, Kimberly Ravener, and James Ligtenberg characterize the federal government.
