U.S. v. Wade

Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing 132-month term of incarceration on possession of child pornography charge, even though said sentence was 12 months longer than top of applicable guideline range. Instant Dist. Ct. had given defendant lenient sentence on prior similar child pornography conviction, and Dist. Ct.’s justification for imposing instant sentence, i.e., fact that defendant had received prior lenient sentence for same offense, and that Dist. Ct. was concerned that defendant would offend again and had not previously relied on his family’s support to overcome his addiction to child pornography, was adequate to explain instant upward variance from sentencing guideline. Ct. rejected defendant’s contention that Dist. Ct.’s reasons for imposing instant upward variance had already been factored into sentencing guideline.