FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T NOVEMB ER 29, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 11 20 5 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :0 8- cr-0 00 45 -SPM -AK-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Plai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, vers us MARK SETH W INNICK, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e North ern Dis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (No ve m be r 29 , 20 10 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, BLACK an d WILSON, Circu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: App el la ntMarkSet h Win ni ckap pe al s h is 16 8- m on th to ta l s en te nc e aft er pl ead in g g ui lt y

to on e co un t o f rec ei vi ng ch il d p orno gr ap hy, in v io la ti on of 1 8U.S.C. § 2 25 2A( a)(2 )(A), (b )(1 ), an d o ne co un t o f po ss es si on of c hi ld

po rn og rap hy, in v io la ti on of 1 8 U.S.C. § 22 52 A(a)(5 )(B) , (b) (2 ). On ap pe al , W in ni ckarg ue s t ha t h is 16 8- m on th to ta l s en te nc e was pr oc edur al ly andsubs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le . Proc edur al ly, he co nt en ds th atth e di st ric t co urt’s cu rs ory

di sc us si on of t he fact or s i n 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a) i s ev id en ce th atitpl acedun du e em

ph as is onth e g ui de li ne ran ge . Sub st an ti ve ly, he arg ue s th athi s t ot al sen te nc e was un reas on ab ly hars h a s ap pl ie d t o afir st -ti m e o ffen de r who is am en ab le to tre at m en t. W e rev ie w th e rea so nabl en es s o f a d is tri ctco urt’s s en te nc e u nd er a de fere nt ia l ab us e o f di sc ret io n s ta nd ard . Gal l v. Un it ed St at es , 55 2 U.S. 3 8, 4 1, 12 8 S . Ct. 5 86 , 59 1, 1 69 L. Ed. 2d44 5 (2 00 7) . In re vi ewin g t he reas on ab le ne ss of a se nt en ce, we co nduc t a t wo- st ep rev ie w. Id
. at 5 1, 1 28 S. Ct. at59 7. Fi rs t we en su re tha t t he sen te nc e was pro cedur al ly reaso nabl e, m ean in g t he di st ric t co urt pr op erl y cal cu la te d t he gu id el in e ran ge , tre at edth e g ui de li ne s as advi so ry , co ns id eredth e § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s, d idno t s el ecta se nt en ce b as edon cle arl y erro ne ou s fa ct s, an d a de qu at el y ex pl ai ne d t he ch os ensen te nc e. Id
. At t he ti m e o f se nt en ci ng , th e co urt s ha ll st at e it s re as on s fo r im po si ng th e p art ic ul ar s en te nc e. 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( c). Howe ve r, th e co urt i s n otrequi redto pro vi de a le ng th y ex pl an at io n o f th e se nt en ce. A br ie f ex pl an at io n m ay be leg al ly suf

fic ie ntwhen 2th e co nt ex t o f th e rec or d i nd ic at es th e rea so ni ng be hi ndth e co urt’s co nc lu si on .

Uni te d Sta te s. v. Ir ey , 61 2 F .3d11 60 , 11 94 -9 5 (1 1t h C ir. 2 01 0) ( en ba nc ) (ci ti ng Rita v. Uni te d Sta te s , 55 1 U.S. 3 38 , 35 8, 1 27 S. Ct. 2 45 6, 2 46 9, 1 68 L. Ed. 2d20 3 (2 00 7) ). Onc e we d et erm in e th ata se nt en ce i s p ro cedur al ly sou nd , we m us t ex am in e whe th er the sen te nc e was subs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le inli gh t o f th e rec or d a ndth e § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. Gal l , 55 2 U.S. at51 , 56 , 12 8 S . Ct. at59 7, 6 00 . The d is tri ct co urt i s re qu ire d t o i m

po se a se nt en ce t ha t i s “ su ffi ci en t, b utno t g reat er than ne ces sa ry to co m pl y wit h the pu rp os es ” li st edin 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(2 ), in cl ud in g th e n eedto refl ectth e se rio us ne ss of t he off en se , pro m ot e res pe ctforth e la w, pr ov id e jus t p un is hm en t fo r th e o ffen se , det er cr im in al co nduc t, p ro te ctth e p ub li c fro m th e d efen da nt ’s futur e cri m in al co nduc t, an d p ro vi de th e d efen da ntwit h ne ed ededuc at io na l o r vo cat io na l t rai ni ng or m ed ic al care . Se e 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(2 ). In i m

po si ng a pa rti cu lar se nt en ce, the co urt m us t al so co ns id er the na tu re an d c irc um st an ces of t he off en se , th e h is to ry

an d c ha ract eri st ic s o f th e de fen da nt , th e k in ds of s en te nc es av ai labl e, th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in e ran ge , th e pe rti ne ntpo li cy

st at em en ts of t he Sen te nc in g C omm is si on , th e n eedto av oi d un warra nt edsen te nc in g d is pa rit ie s, an d t he ne edto pro vi de res ti tu ti on to vi ct im s. Id
. § 3 55 3( a)(1 ), (3 )-(7 ). 3The pa rty chal le ng in g the sen te nc e h as th e b ur de n o f es tabl is hi ng th atth e

se nt en ce was un reas on ab le . Uni te d Sta te s v. Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 88 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). “ [W] he n t he di st ric t co urt i m po se s a s en te nc e wit hi n t he advi so ry Gui de li ne s ra ng e, we or di na ril y wil l ex pe ctth atch oi ce t o b e a rea so nabl e o ne .” Id
. A sen te nc e wel l b el ow the st atut ory m ax im um m ay in fer t he reas on ab le ne ss of th e se nt en ce. Se e Uni te d Sta te s v. Go nz al ez , 55 0 F .3d13 19 , 13 24 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ), cer t. d

en ie d , 12 9 S . Ct. 2 84 8 (2 00 9) . Here, we co nc lu de fro m

th e rec or d t ha t the res ul ti ng 16 8- m on th to ta l se nt en ce was pro cedur al ly andsubs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le . The d is tri ctco urt co rrec tl y cal cu la te d t he gu id el in e ran ge an d s ta te d t ha t i t was advi so ry . Tho ug h th e co urt o nl y

curs or il y di sc us se d t he reas on in g b eh in d i ts de ci si on , th e rec or d in di cat es th atitpro pe rly con si de redth e p art ie s’ arg um en ts . Se e Ir ey , 61 2 F .3dat 11 94 -9 5. In fact , th e co urt co nt in ue d t he in it ia l s en te nc in g h eari ng so th atit wou ldha ve su ffi ci en t t im e to readth e res earc h s tu di es co nc ern in g t he ch il dpo rn og rap hy gu id el in es th atW in ni ckin tro du cedin to ev id en ce. Subs ta nt iv el y , W in ni ck ’s to ta l s en te nc e rep res en te d t he lo wes t en d o f th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in e ran ge of 1 68 -2 10 m on th s, an d we wo ul d o rd in ari ly exp ectsu ch a se nt en ce t o b e reas on ab le . Se e Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3dat 7 88 . The t ot al sen te nc e was als o wel l b el ow th e co m bi ne d 3 0- y ear s ta tu to ry

m ax im um pe na lt y forW in ni ck ’s con vi ct io ns . 4Se e Gon za le z , 55 0 F .3dat 1 32 4 (c on cl ud in g t ha t a s en te nc e was reas on ab le in pa rt be cau se itwas wel l b el ow t he st atut ory m ax im um ). Mo reo ve r, W in ni ckdi d n ot pr es en t m it ig at in g § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s t ha t n eces si ta te d agu id el in e v ari an ce. Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

W in ni ck ’s sen te nc e. AFFIRMED.

5