United States v. Christopher Wilmer

MEMORANDUM

Christopher Cool Wilmer appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 300-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for sex trafficking of a child, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 , 1591(a)(1), (a)(2), (b)(2), 1594(a) and (c); coercion and enticement of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422 (b); transportation of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423 (a) and (e); and violation of the Mann Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2421 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Wilmer contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the court failed to take into account his difficult childhood, and because his victims “suffered less harm than [is] typical” in these crimes. We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Wilmer’s sentence, which was significantly lower than that recommended by the Guidelines, the gov ernment, and the probation officer. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Wilmer’s victims, a…