Quantcast
Home / Opinion / Sentencing — reasonableness

Sentencing — reasonableness

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — reasonableness

A 70-year sentence for producing child pornography is not unreasonable.

“Boroczk must show that his sentence is ‘substantively unreasonable in light of the sentencing factors set forth in section 3553(a).’ Russell, 662 F.3d at 853 (citing United States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606, 608 (7th Cir. 2005)). The district court’s sentence is not unreasonable simply because it emphasized the need for just punishment. Sentencing judges ‘have discretion over how much weight to give a particular factor. Although the weighting must fall “within the bounds of reason,” those bounds “are wide.”’ United States v. Reibel, 688 F.3d 868, 872 (7th Cir. 2012) (internal citations and quotations omitted). Much like the defendant in Noel, Boroczk’s actions were ‘unspeakable.’ 581 F.3d at 501. In Noel, the defendant took nude photographs of his stepbrother’s young son and possessed other images of child pornography. As horrible as that is to imagine, Boroczk’s actions were even more monstrous because he created images and videos of himself molesting his own children, sharing these images with his online ‘friends.’ In that light, and in specific comparison to the 80-year sentence in Noel, Boroczk’s 70-year, below-guidelines sentence is reasonable.”

Affirmed.

12-1022 U.S. v. Boroczk

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Guzman, J., Randa, J.

Leave a Comment