NOT RECOMMENDED F OR FUL L -TEXT PUB L I CATI ON File Na me: 13a0808n.06 No. 11-4400 UNITED STAT ES COURT OF AP P EALS F OR THE S IXTH CIRCUIT

UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA, Plaintiff-Appellee ,
v. FORREST S. TW I GHT, Def endant- Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNI TED ST ATES DI STRI CT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DI STRI CT OF OHI O

Be fore : GI BB ONS, SUTTON, and KETHL EDGE, Circuit Judges.

KETHL EDGE, Circuit J udg e. Fo rre st Twig ht pled g uilty to knowing transporta tion of a

m i n o r in interstate commerc e with intent to eng ag e in criminal sexual activity , in violatio n o f 1 8 U.S.C. §2423(a), a

nd trave ling in interstate commerc e for the purpose of eng ag ing in illi cit sexual conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b). The district court sentenc ed Twight to 220 months’ i m p ri s o n m ent. He now argues that his counsel was ineffe ctive and that his sentenc e was substantively

unrea sonable. We af

firm. I

. I n Summer 2010, the 14-y ear -old victim met 34-y ear -old For rest Twig ht on an I nterne t chat

room. Their communi cation soon included cellular telephone calls, text messag ing, Sky pe, and Fa cebook. Twig ht learne d the victim’s ag e. Their conver sations g rew sexually expli cit. At someNo. 11-4400

USA v. Forre

st Tw ight point, the victim sent Twig ht five naked imag es of herse lf, which wer e later discovere d on Twig ht's thumb dr ive. I n October 2010, Twig ht flew to see the victim in Ohio. He met her at her residenc e and took her

to a motel, wher e they

had sex. The following month, Twight drove the victim from Ohio to his apar

tment in Texas, wher e ag ain they had sex. The victim’s family repor ted her missing. FB Iag ents eve ntually

found her

with Twig ht in Tex as, whe re Tw ight wa s arr ested. The g overnme nt char g ed Twig ht with trans p o rt at i o n of minors with intent to eng ag e in criminal sex ual activity and travel with intent to eng ag e in illicit sexual conduct. Twi gh t initially pled not g uilty

. After trial beg an, Twig ht enter ed a ch an ge o f plea. There afte r, the district court g rante d three continuance s of sentenc ing but denied a fourth. I n Dec ember 2011, the court sentenc ed Twig ht to 220 months’ imprisonment, a sentenc e highe r than the one advocated by the g overnme nt as par t of Twig ht’s g uilty

plea, but within the Guidelines ra ng e of 188 to 235 months. This appea l followed. I I

. Twig ht argues that the district court should have g rante d him a fourth continuance befor e sentenc ing him in Dec ember 2011. “We review denial of a motion for a c ontinuance f or abuse of discretion.” United States v. Garner , 507 F.3d 399, 408 (6th Cir. 2007). On t h i s i ssue, the trial court’s discr etion is “broad[.]” Morris v. Slappy , 461 U.S. 1, 11 (1983). Twig ht’s reque st for a continuance came afte r a November 2011 h e a r in g in which he disputed

a number of points in his prese ntencing repor t. After that hear ing, Twig ht reta ined new counsel, who moved for a continuance for seven day s. The district court denied the motion, stating that, if Twig ht wanted to withdraw his plea, he could do so. Twig h t now contends that the continuance was -2-No. 11-4400

USA v. Forre

st Tw ight

nece ssary to allow counsel to prepa re a sentenc ing memorandum and t o file a motion to strike Twig ht’s rema

rks from the November sentenc ing hear ing, among other tasks. But the problems that Twig ht soug ht to reme dy throug h the continuance wer e larg ely a result of his own statements at the November 2011 hear ing. The district court was not obliga ted to resc ue Twig ht from the conseque nces of those statements. The court’s denial of a fourth continuance , there fore , was not an abuse of its broad discre tion. Twig ht also challeng es the substantive rea sonablene ss of his sentenc e. “We revie w a district court’s sentenc ing decision for substantive rea sonablene ss under the abuse- of-discr etion standard.” United States v. Shaw , 707 F.3d 666, 674 (6th Cir. 2013). “A sentenc e is substantively unrea sonable if the district court selec ts a sentenc e arbitra rily , bases the se ntence on impermissible factor s, fails to consider rele vant sentenc ing fac tors, or g ives an unrea sonable amount of weig ht to any pertinent fac tor.” Id. (citation and inter nal quotation marks omitted) Twig ht’s Guidelines rang e was 188 t o 2 3 5 m onths’ imprisonment, a rang e he does not contest. The district c ourt sentenc ed Twig ht to a within-Guideline sentenc e of 220 months, which

means h i s s en t ence is presumptively rea sonable. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 347 (2007). Twig ht does not offe r any specific arguments as to whether the district court put excessive weig ht on any of t he sentencing fac tors or otherw ise improperly applied 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)

. He just say s his sentenc e is too long. His argument is meritless. See United States v. W arman , 578 F.3d 320, 351 (6th Cir. 2009).

-3-No. 11-4400

USA v. Forre

st Tw ight Twig ht also asser

ts in passing that his sentenc e is proce durally unrea sonable. But he does not develop that argument, so we need not consider it here

. See Barany-Sny der v. W einer , 539 F.3d 327, 331 (6th Cir. 2008). Finally , Twig ht argues that his trial counsel was ineffe ctive. “[O]rdinarily we will not revie w

a claim of ineffe ctive assistance of counsel on direc t appea l beca use the rec ord is usually insufficient to permit adequate revie w of such a claim. These claims are [t hus] more proper ly raised in a postconviction proce eding broug ht pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.” United St ates v. McCarty , 628 F.3d 284, 295 (6th Cir. 2010) (interna l quotations omitted). This claim is no exc ep t i o n . T wi g ht complains about his attorney ’s repr esenta tion with respe ct to Twig ht’s sentenc ing. The rec ord here is not develope d as to why Twig ht’s attorney made t h e d ec i s i o ns he did. We there fore decline to consider T wig ht’s ineffe ctive-a ssistance c laim on direct a ppeal. See id . at 296. The district cour

t’s judgme nt is affirmed.

-4-