United States of America v. David Dolivek

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAVID DOLIVEK,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-50106
D.C. No. 2:02-cr-00045-RSWL-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Ronald S.W. Lew, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted February 12, 2013*
Pasadena, California
Before: GOODWIN, KLEINFELD, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Appellant David Dovilek, convicted of possession of child pornography,
argues that the district court abused its discretion when it modified the conditions
of his supervised release to permit computer use but with a requirement for
keystroke monitoring. We disagree.
FILED
FEB 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
We recognize that keystroke monitoring is more intrusive than mere Internet
monitoring and not appropriate in every case. See United States v. Quinzon, 643
F.3d 1266, 1273 (9th Cir. 2011). However, Dolivek’s illicit computer use involved
more than just online activities. He ran a commercial child pornography
distribution business. In addition, he created his own child pornography
videotapes. A former web designer, Dolivek is a sophisticated computer user who
had the knowledge, software, and experience to avoid detection of more criminal
misuse of his computer, if keystroke monitoring was not imposed. Because
keystroke computer monitoring is reasonably related to the specific circumstances
of Dolivek’s offense and individual characteristics, and the need to protect the
public, the district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Rearden,
349 F.3d 608, 621 (9th Cir. 2003).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --