U.S. v. Pape

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 90-month term of incarceration on charge of possession of child pornography even though defendant argued that more appropriate sentence was 2-year term based on status as upstanding community member, who also had exceptional family responsibilities. Dist. Ct. properly addressed defendant's arguments concerning his personal history and characteristics, as well as his family responsibilities taking care of autistic child, and record otherwise demonstrated Dist. Ct.'s compliance with section 3553(a)(1). Record also showed that Dist. Ct. was aware of its discretion to impose lower sentence based on any disagreements with sentencing guidelines as it applied to defendant.