United States of America v. Alejandro Arturo Scholz

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ALEJANDRO ARTURO SCHOLZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-30367
D.C. No. 6:10-cr-00010-DWM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 21, 2011**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Alejandro Arturo Scholz appeals from the 210-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea convictions for sexual exploitation of children, receipt of
child pornography, and possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
FILED
NOV 28 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-30367 2
§§ 2251(a) & (b), 2252(a)(2), and 2252A(a)(5)(B). We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Scholz contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of
the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors,
the top-of-the-Guidelines sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
Contrary to Scholz’s contention, the record reflects that the district court did
not rely on his need for rehabilitation to impose or lengthen his period of
confinement. See Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382, 2392 (2011) (“A court
commits no error by discussing the opportunities for rehabilitation within prison or
the benefits of specific treatment or training programs.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --