U.S. v. Halliday

Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error when it entered judgments of conviction on charges of receipt and possession of child pornography, even though defendant argued that entry of conviction on both offenses violated Double Jeopardy Clause because possession of child pornography was essentially lesser included offense with respect to charge of receipt of child pornography. Record showed that separate videos formed bases of receipt and possession of child pornography charges, and thus entry of judgment as to both charges did not affect defendant’s substantial rights under plain error analysis. Remand, though, was required for new sentencing hearing where defendant’s 240-month term of incarceration was based, in part, on Dist. Ct.’s unsubstantiated finding that defendant had improperly asserted that charged offenses were either not criminal in nature or pertained to victimless offenses.