United States v. Andrew Rice

MEMORANDUM

Andrew David Rice appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 108-month sentence imposed upon re-sentencing, following his jury-trial conviction for viewing child pornography, in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Rice contends that the district court violated this court’s mandate when resentenc-ing him by denying him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, refusing to reduce his sentence due to his post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”), and directing that the child pornography videos be made part of the record on appeal. We disagree. This court’s disposition did not direct the district court to make specific sentencing findings nor did it restrict what evidence the district court could consider during resentencing.

The district court did not clearly err in declining to grant an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility because Rice consistently denied the factual element of his offense that he acted knowingly. See United States v. Johal, 428 F.3d 823, 830 (9th Cir.2005) (“[T]he reduction is inappropriate where the defendant does not admit that he or she…