Mayra Dominguez-Cortez v. Michael B. Mukasey

1The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the
District of Minnesota.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-1417
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Minnesota.
David John Luoma, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: October 7, 2009
Filed: October 8, 2009
___________
Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
David John Luoma appeals the district court’s1 imposition of a $10,000 fine
upon his guilty plea to a pornography offense, arguing that the court did not properly
consider the burden the fine would place on Luoma’s wife, and that the fine is
unreasonable under the circumstances. We review the imposition of a fine and the
determination of its amount for clear error. See United States v. Herron, 539 F.3d
881, 888 (8th Cir. 2008). Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that the
court did not err: the court properly considered appropriate factors before imposing

-- 1 of 2 --

2Contrary to the government’s position, we conclude that the issue was
adequately preserved for appeal. See United States v. Bauer, 19 F.3d 409, 413 (8th
Cir. 1994) (although defendant made only vague objection to his financial situation,
defendant adequately preserved issue for appeal).
-2-
the fine, including Luoma’s ability to pay the fine and the burden the fine would have
on Luoma’s wife, and the court imposed a fine at the bottom of the applicable
Guidelines range. See U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2(d)(1)-(8) (factors court must consider before
imposing a fine); Herron, 539 F.3d at 888-89 (record must provide sufficient
information to establish factors were considered before fine is imposed). 2
Accordingly, we affirm.
______________________________

-- 2 of 2 --