T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. CHRI ST OPHER W AY NE HA LB ER T, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 50164 D. C . No . 5 : 0 8 - c r - 0 0 1 5 9 - VA P ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia V i r gi ni aA . P hi l l i ps , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 6, 2012 ** B efo re: B . F L E T C H E R , R E IN H A R D T , an dT A S H IM A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C hri st op her W ayne H albertappeal s f rom the 12 0-m on th sent ence i m po se d f o llo w in g h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n f o rp o s s e s s io n o f

c h ildp o rn o g r ap h y , in v i o l a t i o n o f

1 8 U . S. C. § 2 2 5 2 A ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B) . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n dw e a f

f i rm. 

# FI LED MA R 09 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 50164 2 H a lb e rt f ir s t c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o c e du r a llye rr e db yf a ilin g to appr e c i a t e i t s di s c r e t i on t o va ryf r om the a dvi s oryS e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s r a nge on pol i c ygr ounds , a nd byf a i l i ng t o e xpl a i n w hyi tr e j e c t e d hi s pol i c ya r gum e nt s . T he r e c or d be l i e s the s e c ont e nt i ons . T he c ourtc ons i de r e d H a l be rt ’ s a r gum e nt s a nd e x p la in e dth e s e n te n c e s u f f ic ie n tlyto p e rm it m e a n in g f u l ap p e lla te r e v ie w . See U n ite d S ta tes v . Ca r ty , 5 2 0 F .3 d9 8 4 , 9 9 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ( e n b a n c ) ; U ni ted States v . H e nde rs on , 649 F . 3d 955, 964 ( 9th C i r . 2011) ( “ [ D ] i s tr i c tc ourt s a r e not ob l i gat ed t o v ary f

rom the chi l d p orno graphy G ui del i nes on p ol i cygrou nd s i f they do no thave, i n fac t , a pol i cydi sa gree m entw i th them . ”) . H a lb e rt n e x t c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e db yim p o s in g av u ln e r ab le v ic tim a d ju s tm e n t u n d e rU .S .S .G . § 3 A 1 .1 ( b ) ( 1 ) , b e c au s e th e a d ju s tm e n t s h o u ld no tappl y i n a po ss es si on of chi l d p orno graphy cas e. H i s c on t ent i on i s f orec l osed b y U ni te d States v . L

y nn , 63 6 F . 3d 11 27 , 11 39 (9th C i r. 20 11 ). H a lb e rt f in a llyc o n te n d s th a t h is s e n te n c e is s u b s ta n tiv e lyu n r e a s o n ab le . W e co n si d er p o l i cy arg u m en t s l i k e H al b ert ’ s w i th i n th e co n t ex to f th e reaso n ab l en ess o f th e f in a l s e n te n c e . Se e U

ni te d States v . B ars umy an , 517 F . 3d 1154, 1158- 59 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) . T h e r e c o r dr e f le c ts th a t H a lb e rt’s s e n te n c e is s u b s ta n tiv e ly re as on abl e i n l i gh tof the t ot al i ty of the ci rc um st ance s and the 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) s e n te n c in g f

a c to r s . See G al l

v. U ni ted States , 55 2 U . S . 38 , 51 (200 7). AF F I RME D.