Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 40-year term of incarceration on charge of production of child pornography. Record showed that defendant plied minors with marijuana and alcohol at his home, secretly recorded minors engaging in sexual acts, and at times sexually touched said minors, and Dist Ct. explained need for instant lengthy sentence due to serious nature of offense, harm imposed on victims, and need to protect public from defendant. Moreover, while defendant argued that Dist Ct. failed to fully consider his arguments in mitigation that included his own alleged sexual abuse as child, his drug abuse and his low risk of reoffending, much of defendant’s claims in mitigation lacked evidentiary foundation and thus required no response from Dist. Ct. Also, Ct. rejected defendant’s claim that sentence was unreasonable even though defendant claimed that length of sentence was tantamount to death sentence.