[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-10525 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Non-Argument Calendar OCTOBER 22, 2010
________________________ JOHN LEY
CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 8:09-cr-00425-VMC-MAP-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ANTHONY MCCARTY,
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(October 22, 2010)
Before EDMONDSON, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony McCarty appeals his sentence of imprisonment for 108 months
after pleading guilty to receiving child pornography. 18 U.S.C. §§ 2552(a), (b)(1).
McCarty argues that his sentence is both procedurally and substantively
unreasonable and violates the Eighth Amendment. We affirm.
We review the reasonableness of a sentence deferentially for abuse of
discretion. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41, 128 S. Ct. 586, 591 (2007). We
review an objection raised for the first time on appeal for plain error. United
States v. Massey, 443 F.3d 814, 818 (11th Cir. 2006).
McCarty’s sentence is reasonable. The district court adopted the undisputed
facts in the presentencing information report; considered the relevant sentencing
factors, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including the factors addressed by McCarty’s
witness; and stated a sufficient reason for imposing a sentence in the middle of the
guideline range. McCarty also was sentenced well below the statutory maximum.
McCarty’s remaining argument, raised for the first time on appeal, also fails.
McCarty cannot establish that his sentence is so grossly disproportionate to his
offense as to violate the Eighth Amendment. The district court did not plainly err
in sentencing McCarty within the statutory limits, which neither this Court nor the
Supreme Court has held are cruel or unusual.
McCarty’s sentence is
AFFIRMED.
2