The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has affirmed a 271-month federal prison sentence imposed on Chad Allen Pease for attempted enticement of a minor to engage in sexual activity and commission of a felony offense involving a minor by a registered sex offender.
In a per curiam opinion filed Jan. 2, 2026, a three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges Jordan, Rosenbaum, and Grant rejected Pease's appeal of his conviction and sentence from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Pease was convicted by a jury on charges of attempted enticement of a minor to engage in sexual activity and commission of a felony offense involving a minor by a registered sex offender. The conviction resulted in a substantial 271-month sentence, equivalent to nearly 22.6 years in federal prison.
On appeal, Pease argued that the district court committed error by denying him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 3E1.1. This provision allows for a sentence reduction when defendants demonstrate genuine acceptance of responsibility for their criminal conduct.
The Eleventh Circuit applied the deferential clear-error standard of review to evaluate the district court's determination regarding acceptance of responsibility. As the court noted in its opinion, citing *United States v. Andres* (11th Cir. 2020), "We review a district court's determination of a defendant's acceptance of responsibility for clear error."
Under this highly deferential standard, appellate courts will not disturb a district court's findings "unless we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed," the court explained, citing *United States v. Clarke* (11th Cir. 2009).
The clear-error standard places a significant burden on defendants seeking to overturn district court determinations on acceptance of responsibility. Courts recognize that trial judges are in the best position to evaluate a defendant's conduct throughout the proceedings and determine whether genuine acceptance of responsibility has been demonstrated.
Acceptance of responsibility reductions under § 3E1.1 can provide meaningful sentence reductions for defendants who acknowledge wrongdoing, demonstrate remorse, and cooperate with authorities. However, the reduction is not automatic and requires a case-by-case evaluation of the defendant's conduct and attitude throughout the criminal proceedings.
The charges against Pease represent serious federal offenses involving the protection of minors. Federal law imposes severe penalties for attempted enticement of minors, particularly when committed by registered sex offenders. The enhancement for commission of a felony offense involving a minor by a registered sex offender reflects Congress's intent to impose heightened penalties on repeat offenders who pose ongoing risks to children.
Attempted enticement of a minor typically involves using interstate communications, such as the internet, to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to engage in sexual activity. These cases often involve undercover law enforcement operations designed to identify and prosecute individuals who prey on children online.
The requirement that Pease was a registered sex offender at the time of the offense significantly increased his potential sentence. Federal sentencing guidelines impose enhanced penalties on defendants with prior sex offense convictions, reflecting the recognition that such individuals pose heightened risks of recidivism.
Pease's case originated in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, which covers the central portion of the state including Orlando, Tampa, and surrounding areas. The district court's handling of the case, including its denial of the acceptance of responsibility reduction, has now been validated by the Eleventh Circuit's affirmance.
The Eleventh Circuit's decision was issued as a "not for publication" opinion, indicating it was decided on the non-argument calendar. Such dispositions are common in cases where the legal issues are well-settled and do not require extensive briefing or oral argument.
The 271-month sentence imposed on Pease represents one of the more substantial penalties for these types of offenses, reflecting both the severity of the charges and his status as a registered sex offender. The sentence ensures Pease will remain incarcerated for more than two decades.
This case demonstrates the federal judiciary's commitment to protecting minors from exploitation and imposing serious consequences on those who attempt to victimize children. The affirmance by the Eleventh Circuit reinforces the appropriateness of the district court's sentencing decision and its evaluation of Pease's conduct throughout the proceedings.
With the Eleventh Circuit's decision, Pease's conviction and sentence are now final unless he seeks further review by the Supreme Court, which rarely grants certiorari in routine criminal appeals. The lengthy federal sentence ensures he will remain incarcerated well into the 2040s, serving as both punishment for his crimes and protection for potential future victims.