Case ID: f-appx_329/html/0146-01.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. James Dale MIDWELL, Defendant— Appellant.
    No. 08-30425.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 14, 2009.
    
    Filed July 21, 2009.
    Stephanie Joyce Lister, USSP-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Christina Lee Hunt, Senior Litigation, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

James Dale Midwell appeals from the lifetime period of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(A)(a)(5)(B). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Midwell contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider all of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and that a lifetime term of supervised release is substantively unreasonable. The district did not procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). The lifetime term of supervised release is not substantively unreasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances. See United States v. Daniels, 541 F.3d 915, 922-24 (9th Cir.2008); see also Carty, 520 F.3d at 993.

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