United States v. Donald Gillespie
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Donald S. Gillespie (“Gillespie”) pled guilty to' a single count of knowingly possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). He was sentenced to a 120-month term of imprisonment. Gillespie appeals, arguing that the district court committed procedural errors and imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence. We affirm.
Gillespie contends that the district court failed to remain mindful of the Sentencing Guidelines range and provided an inadequate justification for the upward variance of his sentence. The district court calculated the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range, heard extensive argument from the parties, and analyzed the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) factors. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49-50 , 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). The record therefore reflects that the district court remained cognizant of the Sentencing Guidelines throughout the sentencing proceeding. Gall, 552 U.S. at 50 n. 6, 128 S.Ct. 586 ; Carty, 520 F.3d at 991 . In considering the § 3553(a) factors, the district court also sufficiently explained the basis for the variance between the…