United States v. Jeffrey Brian Nickel

[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-11333 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT Non-Argument Calendar JULY 25, 2011 ________________________ JOHN LEY CLERK D.C. Docket No. 4:09-cr-00017-HLM-WEJ-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JEFFREY BRIAN NICKEL, Defendant - Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ________________________ (JULY 25, 2011) Before EDMONDSON, PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Jeffrey Brian Nickel appeals his 10-year sentence for using a computer connected to the internet to attempt knowingly to persuade, induce, entice, and coerce someone under the age of 18 to engage in illegal sexual activity, for which he could be charged with child molestation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). The appeal presents the issue: Whether the imposition of the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Nickel’s objection at the sentencing hearing to the constitutionality of the mandatory minimum sentence required by § 2422(b) was sufficient to preserve, for appeal, his claim that the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence violated his rights under the Eighth Amendment. The appropriate standard of review is de novo. Because a ten-year sentence is not grossly disproportionate to this crime, his Eighth Amendment claim is without merit. For background, see United States v. Brenton-Farley, 607 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir. 2010), cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 369 (2010). AFFIRMED. 2