U.S. v. Garthus

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 360-month term of incarceration on child pornography charges, even though defendant contended that Dist. Ct. had failed to adequately consider defendant's argument that he had diminished capacity to avoid committing charged offenses that concerned possession of pornography involving girls from ages 4 through 9. Defendant failed to mention his diminished capacity during sentencing hearing, and defendant's argument that he could not obtain adequate treatment in prison for his condition actually cuts in favor of imposing substantial sentence. Moreover, Dist. Ct. could disbelieve defendant's argument that 180-month sentence was more reasonable because he was unlikely to commit more sex crimes upon his release from prison at that proposed time.