Case ID: f-appx_414/html/0911-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Scott RICHARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-30036.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 10, 2011.
    
    Filed Jan. 24, 2011.
    Marcia Kay Hurd, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Usbi-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
    Palmer A. Hoovestal, Hoovestal Law Firm, Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Anthony Scott Richards appeals from the 168-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Richards contends that his sentence is unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to accomplish the statutory purposes of sentencing when considered in light of his significant mental health issues. The record reflects that the district court carefully considered his mental condition and emotional state as part of its analysis of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and provided a well-reasoned and thorough explanation for the sentence imposed. The district court did not procedurally err, and the sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); see also United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.