Astore

United States v. Astore

Good Law
50 F. App'x 868
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 2002No. 01-30331; D.C. No. CR-00-00016-RCTCalifornia336 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Patrick Louis Astore (“Astore”) appeals the concurrent 108-month sentences imposed following his guilty plea to one count of receipt of child pornography and one count of possession of child pornography. We review de novo a district court’s interpretation and application of the Sentencing Guidelines, United States v. Johnson, 297 F.3d 845, 867 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

*869 Astore argues that the district court’s five-point enhancement for a pattern of activity under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(4) is impermissible double counting because his past convictions for sexual abuse of minors were already accounted for in his criminal history category and led to the imposition of a statutorily mandated minimum sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(b)(l). “Impermissible double counting occurs only when one part of the Guidelines is applied to increase a defendant’s punishment on account of a kind of harm that has already been fully accounted for by application of another part of the Guidelines. ” United States v. Martin, 278 F.3d 988, 1004 (9th Cir.2002) (quoting United States v. Alexander, 48 F.3d 1477, 1492 (9th Cir. 1995)) (emphases added). Mandatory minimum sentences do not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.