United States v. Armando Mendoza-Peralta

MEMORANDUM

Armando Mendoza-Peralta appeals the sentence he received following his conviction by guilty plea to one count of receiving images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252 (a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

1. The district court did not proeedurally err by supposedly inadequately explaining its selection of a sex offender evaluation condition that includes a “physiological testing” requirement. A physiological testing condition that entails penile plethysmograph testing implicates a “particularly significant liberty interest,” such that a sentencing court imposing such a condition must meet heightened procedural requirements. United States v. Weber, 451 F.3d 552, 568-69 (9th Cir.2006). But the district court explained that the physiological testing required under the condition it imposed would not include the type of “intrusive” testing, like plethysmograph testing, that requires “further justification” by the court. The United States Probation Office (“USPO”) thus cannot order Mendoza to undergo penile plethysmograph testing under this…