United States v. Kiefer, No. 13-50182 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his sentence after pleading guilty to one count of receiving child pornography. Defendant challenged the constitutionality of U.S.S.G. 2G2.2 and the five-year mandatory minimum sentence. The court concluded that section 2G2.2 neither violates the separation of powers doctrine nor conflicts with 18 U.S.C. 3553; the court joined its sister circuits and held that the district court's application of a two-level enhancement for the use of a computer under section 2G2.2(b)(6) does not result in impermissible double counting; and because the district court properly applied section 2G2.2, defendant lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of the five-year mandatory minimum as it did not affect his sentence. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed a sentence imposed following the defendant’s guilty plea to receiving child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252. The panel held that U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 neither violates the separation of powers doctrine nor conflicts with 18 U.S.C. § 3553. The panel held that the district court’s application of a two-level enhancement for the use of a computer under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(6) does not result in impermissible double counting. The panel concluded that because the district court properly applied § 2G2.2, the defendant lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of the five-year mandatory minimum codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2252(b)(1), as it did not affect his sentence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.