22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T471,MEMORANDUM Ralph Delbert Brown, III appeals from the duration and the conditions of the term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for sexual abuse of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 (a) and 2243(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Brown contends that his lifetime term of supervised release is unreasonable. Under the totality of circumstances, including the ongoing nature of sexual abuse, the lifetime of supervised release is warranted. See United States v. Cope, 527 F.3d 944, 952 (9th Cir.2008). Brown also challenges several conditions of his supervised release. Brown’s challenges of the special supervised release conditions number six, eight, and nine lack merit. See United States v. Bee, 162 F.3d 1232, 1235-36 (9th Cir.1998). Brown’s challenge of the special supervised release condition number 11 also lacks merit. See United States v. Wise, 391 F.3d 1027, 1031 (9th Cir.2004); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(2)(C). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T4a3,

MEMORANDUM

Ralph Delbert Brown, III appeals from the duration and the conditions of the term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for sexual abuse of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 (a) and 2243(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Brown contends that his lifetime term of supervised release is unreasonable. Under the totality of circumstances, including the ongoing nature of sexual abuse, the lifetime of supervised release is warranted. See United States v. Cope, 527 F.3d 944, 952 (9th Cir.2008).

Brown also challenges several conditions of his supervised release. Brown’s challenges of the special supervised release conditions number six, eight, and nine lack merit. See United States v. Bee, 162 F.3d 1232, 1235-36 (9th Cir.1998). Brown’s challenge of the special supervised release condition number 11 also lacks merit. See United States v. Wise, 391 F.3d 1027, 1031 (9th Cir.2004); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(2)(C).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.