United States v. Rouland, No. 12-50517 (5th Cir. 2013)Annotate this Case
Defendant appealed his sentence and conditions of supervised release stemming from his conviction for possessing and attempting to possess child pornography. The court concluded that although the district court failed to provide any explanation of reasons supporting defendant's sentence, this error did not constitute reversible plain error because defendant was sentenced to a within-Guidelines sentence of 30 months and defendant failed to demonstrate how a fuller explanation would have altered his sentence. The court rejected defendant's challenge to the district court's imposition of the special conditions because he could not demonstrate that any error affected his substantial rights. Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion by not orally pronouncing the challenged standard conditions where the subject conditions were categorized as "standard" in the judgment form and there was record evidence supporting these conditions. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.