[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-11553 FEB 2, 2012
Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY
________________________ CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 4:10-cr-00042-SPM-WCS-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL ALAN REAID,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(February 2, 2012)
Before CARNES, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Reaid appeals the substantive reasonableness of his 97-month
sentence, imposed within the applicable guideline range, after pleading guilty to
one count of receiving and distributing child pornography in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(A), (b)(1). On appeal, Reaid argues his sentence is
substantively unreasonable because it was calculated pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 2G2.2. He claims the enhancements to § 2G2.2 are unsupported by empirical
data and result in irrational sentences, and § 2G2.2 is thus fundamentally
incompatible with the sentencing requirements and purposes under18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a). After review, we affirm Reaid’s sentence.1
Reaid’s 97-month sentence is substantively reasonable. We have previously
held that § 2G2.2 adequately takes into account empirical data and national
experience. See United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179, 1201 n.15 (11th Cir. 2008).
We also noted the child pornography guidelines reflect Congress’s “longstanding
concern for recidivism in [child pornography] cases.” Id. Moreover, Reaid’s
sentence is reasonable in light of the § 3553(a) factors and the totality of the
circumstances. The district court stated that it had considered the § 3553(a)
factors, see United States v. Turner, 474 F.3d 1265, 1281 (11th Cir. 2007), and the
1
We review the reasonableness of a sentence under a deferential abuse-of-discretion
standard of review. Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 591 (2007).
2
court noted that the sentence reflected the seriousness of the offense and the need
for adequate deterrence. The court also imposed a sentence at the bottom of the
guideline range based on Reaid’s arguments in mitigation. Reaid has not met his
burden to show an abuse of discretion.
AFFIRMED.
3