FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MAINE [Hon. George Z. Singal, U.S. District Judge]
J. Cyr and Law Offices of Peter J. Cyr on brief for
E. Delahanty II, United States Attorney, and Margaret D.
McGaughey, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for
Thompson, Stahl, and Barron, Circuit Judges.
THOMPSON, Circuit Judge.
2014, Akylle Murchison was picked up and charged in
connection with a lengthy investigation into a
cocaine-producing and -selling conspiratorial enterprise.
Murchison pled guilty to a one-count indictment for violating
21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 (he conspired with
others to distribute, and possessed with intent to
distribute, twenty-eight grams or more of mixtures containing
cocaine and cocaine base) and to a one-count information
under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (he possessed with intent to
distribute a substance containing bk-MDEA, or ethylone,
usually called a "bath salt").
sentencing and in his sentencing memorandum, Murchison
objected to the Pre-Sentence Investigation Report's (PSR)
inclusion of paragraphs 10 and 83, which reference
information (false information, says Murchison) given by a
cooperating source who claims Murchison also was involved in
purchasing firearms. Murchison asked the court to strike those
paragraphs, or at least to initial the paragraphs and
indicate that there were insufficient facts to support the
information. In ruling, the district-court judge explained,
"All right, I'm going to leave [the paragraphs] in
the report. I'm going to indicate for the record that it
won't make any difference with regard to whatever
sentence I give, but I think it's proper to be in the
report." After another effort by Murchison, in which he
argued that the information contained in paragraphs 10 and 83
would negatively impact the Bureau of Prison's (BOP)
classification determination and the availability of a
500-hour drug treatment program, the judge reiterated:
"I'm not going to strike it. I think I was more than
lenient in not using it as part of my sentencing
determination. It's an accurate statement, and to the
extent the Bureau of Prisons considers it so be it, though
I'm advised by probation it probably won't happen,
though that doesn't enter into my judgment on
that." In due course, Murchison was sentenced to
concurrent prison terms of 108 months.
appeal, Murchison presents us with two complaints: (1) the
court erred when it refused to strike paragraphs 10 and 83
from the PSR, and therefore the matter
should be remanded so the PSR can be
amended,  and (2) the sentence imposed is
unreasonable. We take each in turn.
32 and the Bureau of Prisons
claims the court's refusal to strike these paragraphs was
a violation of Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B). He also says the
paragraphs' inclusion is prejudicial to the way in which
the BOP will classify and house him, and will negatively
affect the availability of rehabilitation programs. We review
a district court's compliance with Rule 32 de novo.
United States v. Acevedo, 824 F.3d 179, 184 (1st
Cir. 2016) (quoting United States v.
González-Vélez, 587 F.3d 494, 508 (1st
we get into these issues, we provide the following primer to
explain generally how the pieces of this Rule 32-and-the-BOP
puzzle come together.
32(i)(3)(B) -- the subsection specifically raised by
Murchison -- instructs that a court "must -- for any
disputed portion of the presentence report or other
controverted matter --rule on the dispute or determine that a
ruling is unnecessary either because the matter will not
affect sentencing, or because the court will not consider the
matter in sentencing." Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B). And
Rule 32(i)(3)(C) suggests a clear connection between the PSR
and the BOP: it requires a court to "append a copy of
the court's determinations under this rule to any copy of
the presentence report made available to the Bureau of
Prisons." Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(C). So Rule
32(i)(3)(C) tells us that the PSR, accompanied by other Rule
32 "determinations, " gets sent to the BOP.
part, the BOP's Inmate Security and Custody
Classification Manual (the BOP Manual) explains that, prior
to classification, the Designation and Sentence Computation
Center (DSCC) must receive all sentencing material, including
the PSR, judgment, statement of reasons (SOR),  and an
"Individual Custody and Detention
Report" from the sentencing court, U.S. Probation
Office (USPO), and the U.S. Marshals Service
(USMS).Custody & Care: Designations,
Fed. Bureau of Prisons,
(last visited July 17, 2017); see also Fed. Bureau
of Prisons, Program Statement: ...