Background
Michael Chase Watson appealed his sentence after pleading guilty to receipt and possession of child pornography. He argued that certain discretionary conditions of supervised release were not adequately pronounced at sentencing. The Government requested enforcement of an appeal waiver in Watson’s plea agreement.
The court’s reasoning
The court determined it need not address the Government’s request to enforce the appeal waiver. The court found that the record supported the fact that the defendant had an opportunity to review the presentence report with counsel and a reasonable inference that he did so. Consequently, the court found no plain error in the district court’s failure to expressly inquire whether the defendant reviewed the presentence report and its appendix with counsel before sentencing.
The dissent
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that appellate courts may infer a defendant’s review of the presentence report from the record, even without an express inquiry by the district court, though some judges advocate for explicit confirmation.