United States v. Ohanes Haladjian

MEMORANDUM

Ohanes Haladjian appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B), (b)(2). Haladjian contends that the district court erred at sentencing when it imposed an adjustment for obstruction of justice. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Haladjian contends that the district court violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 .by failing to make adequate findings regarding who purchased a one-way airline ticket to Jordan and whó checked in for that flight. Because he did not object on these grounds in the district court, we review for plain error. See United States v. Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1101 (9th Cir.2013). Haladjian never objected to any of the facts set forth in the presentence reports (“PSRs”) relating to the obstruction of justice issue, including the assertions that he purchased the plane ticket, possessed the' plane ticket, and checked in for the flight. Therefore, Rule 32 did not apply and the district court did not plainly err. See Christensen, 732 F.3d at 1102 ; United States v.…