U.S. v. Lewis

Defendant waived claim on appeal that his life term of supervised release on certain child pornography-related charges was improper because Dist. Ct. had failed to give adequate explanations for length of his supervised release or for imposition of certain standard and special conditions of supervised release. Presentence report, which was provided to defendant weeks before sentencing hearing, included all proposed terms of supervised release that were actually imposed, and defendant’s counsel answered “no” to Dist. Ct. inquiry as to whether defendant had any legal objection to or need for future elaboration of its reasons for instant conditions of supervised release.