U.S. v. Boyle

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 50-year term of incarceration (arising out of his sexual assault of eight-year old girl that he video livestreamed to other child sexual predators), even though Dist. Ct. imposed said sentence consecutively to 40-year term of incarceration on possession of child pornography conviction that state-court had previously imposed on defendant. While defendant argued that Dist. Ct. should have imposed instant sentence concurrently with his state-court sentence under section 5G1.3(b) of USSG, Ct. of Appeals found no error in imposing instant consecutive sentence, since defendant’s state-court conviction did not qualify as “relevant conduct” for purposes of instant federal conviction, where: (1) conduct at issue in his state-court offense occurred prior to date of instant federal offense and did not concern harm that resulted from his federal conduct; (2) state-court conduct could not be viewed as part of same course of conduct or common scheme at issue in instant federal offense, where both offenses involved different victims, concerned materially different conduct and occurred at different times. Also, defendant’s sentence was not substantively unreasonable, where it was within relevant guideline range and contemplated severity of defendant’s conduct and need to protect victim from defendant.