United States v. Ryan Hamburg

MEMORANDUM

Ryan Hamburg appeals from the 35-year sentence imposed following his guilty plea convictions for production of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (a),(e), receipt and distribution of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252 (a)(2), (b)(1), and possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252 (a)(4)(B), (b)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Hamburg contends that the district court failed to provide an adequate explanation for the sentence, including failing to adequately discuss the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) factors and failing to address arguments he made for a lower sentence. Because Hamburg did not object on these grounds at sentencing, plain error review applies. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010). Hamburg therefore must show not only that there was error that was plain, but also that such error affected his substantial rights because there is a reasonable probability that he would have received a differ- , ent sentence absent the error. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761-62 (9th Cir. 2008).

It is apparent from the record that the court…