Case ID: f-appx_425/html/0563-02.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. Russell BRADNEY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-30109.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted March 8, 2011.
    
    Filed March 29, 2011.
    Cyndee Peterson, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, Marcia Kay Hurd, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    James B. Obie, Óbie Law, P.C., Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Russell Bradney appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his bench-trial 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.

Bradney contends that the sentence is procedurally and substantively unreasonable in light of the district court’s failure to consider and adequately weigh all of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including his lack of criminal history and the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities. The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err and that, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the sentence was substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988, 998-1002 (9th Cir.2008).

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