Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 156-month term of incarceration on child pornography charge, even though defendant argued that said sentence was substantively unreasonable, since, at age 62 and having diabetes, his sentence was de facto life sentence in prison. Defendant failed to present issue to Dist. Ct., and thus Dist. Ct. cannot be faulted for sentencing defendant to 13-year prison term and failing to address actuarial impact of defendant's age and health status. Moreover, instant sentence was within applicable guideline range, and Dist. Ct. provided adequate explanation for instant sentence, where Dist. Ct. found more significant than defendant’s age and medical condition, seriousness of defendant’s conduct, his wavering acceptance of responsibility and his substantial risk of recidivism.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing