N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lle e , v. TODD M IC HAEL SHER M AN, De fe nda n t-Appe l la

nt. No. 17-50031

DC No. C R 16-1784 GPC
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Sta t e s Distric t C ourt for the Southe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Gonz a lo P. C urie l, Distric t Judge , Pre siding A rgue d a nd Subm itte d Ja

nua ry 11, 2019 Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : TASHIM A and WATFORD, C i rc uit Judge s, a nd R OB R ENO, * * Distric t Judge
. De fe nda nt-Appe lla

nt Todd She rm an ple a de d guilty to distribution of im

a g e s of m inors e nga ge d in se xua lly e xplic it c onduc t in viola

t ion of 18 U.S.C
. § 2252(a )(2). On a

ppe a l, She rm an c ha lle n ge s one of the c o nditions of supe rvise d 

# FIL ED
JAN 28 2019 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U

. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The Honora

ble Edua rdo C . R obre n o, Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the E a s te rn Distric t of Pe nnsy lva nia , sitting by

de s igna tion.re le a se that

will be im

pose d a fte r his te rm

of im prisonm e nt e nds. C ondition 9
re quire s tha

t She rm an : Not posse ss or vie w a

ny m ate ria ls suc h a s vide os, m a ga z i ne s, photogra phs, c om pute r im a ge s or othe r m a tte r that de pic ts “ se xua lly e xplic i t c onduc t” involving c hildre n a s de fine d by 18 U.S.C . § 2256(2); a

nd/or “ a c tua l se xua lly e xplic it c onduc t” involving a d ults a s de fine d by 18 USC 2257(h)(1), not pa troniz e any pla c e whe re suc h m a te ria ls or e nte rta inm e nt a re the prim ary

m a t e ria l or e nte rta inm e nt a

va ila ble
. W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . §§ 1291 a nd 3742. She rm an prope rly obje c te d to C ondition 9, so we re vie w the distric t c ourt’ s im position of the
c ondition for a

n a buse of disc re tion. Se e Unite d State s v . Gnirk e , 775 F.3d 1155, 1159 (9th C ir. 2015). W e a ffirm
. 1. The distric t c ourt did not c om m it proc e dura l e rror in im p osing C ondition 9. Se e Unite d State s v . C arty , 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th C ir. 2008) (e n ba nc ) (dire c ting tha

t “ we first c onside r whe the r the distric t c o urt c om m itte d signific ant proc e dura l e rror” ). The distric t c o urt e xpla ine d tha

t C ondition 9 wa s
warra n te d be c a

use She rm an a dm itte d tha t his de se nsitiz at ion to a dult pornogra phy le d him to se e k out m ore and m ore e xtre m e ve rsions of pornogra phy , inc luding
c hild pornogra

phy
. The re fore , im

posing C ondition 9 wa s re a s ona bly ne c e ssa ry in light of “ the nature and c irc um s ta nc e s of the offe n se and the history and

2c ha

ra c te ristic s of the de fe n da n t ,” to “prote c t the public from furthe r c rim e s of the de fe nda n t.” Se e 18 U.S.C . § 3553(a )(1), (2); 18 U.S.C
. § 3583(d)(1). 2. C ondition 9 is not substa ntive ly unre a sona

ble unde r Gnirk e . C onditions a

re substa ntive ly re a sona ble “ i f the y

are re a s ona

bly re late d to the goa l of de te rre nc e , prote c tion of thepublic , or re ha bilita t ion of the offe nde r, a

nd involve no gre a te r de priva

tion of libe rty

tha n is re a sona

bly ne c e ssa

ry for the purpose s of supe rvise d re le a se .” Unite d State s v . Danie ls , 541 F.3d 915, 924 (9th C ir. 2008) (quoting Unite d State

s v . Re arde n , 349 F.3d608, 618 (9th C ir. 2003)). Prohibiting She rm an from

vie wing or posse ssing m a te ria ls de pic ting a dult, la sc ivious fullfronta l nudity

(or pa troniz ing a

ny pla c e whe re suc h m a te ria ls or e nte rta inm e nt a re the p rim ary

m a te ria l or e nte rta inm e nt a va ila ble ) is re a sona

b ly re l a te d to the goa l of prote c ting the public
. Suc h a re stric tion he lps pre ve nt furthe r de se nsitiz a tion to
a dult pornogra

phy , whic h c ould le a d She rm a n to se e k out c hild pornogra phy a ga in. C ondition 9 is a

lso signific antly

na rrowe r tha

n the c ondition in Gnirk

e and doe s not de prive She rm an of m ore libe rty tha n is re a sona

bly ne c e s sa ry . Unlike the
c ondition in Gnirk

e that prohibite d the de fe nda nt from posse ssing or vie wing both

“ a c tua l” and “ sim

ulate d” se xua lly

e xplic it c onduc t involving adults, 775 F.3d a t 1163, the c ha lle nge d supe rvise d re le a se c ondition he re only c ove rs “ a c tua l ”
se xua l ly e xplic it c onduc t involving adults a nd doe s not inc o rpora te the e ntire ty of
318 U.S.C . § 2256(2). The re fore , C ondition 9 is substa n tive ly re a sona

ble be c a use it doe s not re a c h be y ond a dult pornogra phy to e nc om

pa ss portra

y a ls of se x in a

rt, lite ra ture , a

nd sc ie ntific works, a s the origina l c ondition in Gnirk e did. Se e 775 F.3d at 1165. AFFIRM E D.

4