United States v. Korteland

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJuly 11, 2024
Docket23-50752
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Korteland (United States v. Korteland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Korteland, (5th Cir. 2024).

Opinion

Case: 23-50752 Document: 57-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/11/2024

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 23-50752 July 11, 2024 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Timothy Rey Korteland,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:22-CR-621-1 ______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Timothy Rey Korteland pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography, and the district court sentenced him within the guidelines range to 78 months of imprisonment, followed by 15 years of supervised release. On appeal, he contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court (1) did not account for his history and

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-50752 Document: 57-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/11/2024

No. 23-50752

characteristics and (2) clearly erred in balancing the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Here, the district court considered Korteland’s mitigating evidence at the sentencing hearing regarding his autism diagnosis and explained why it was unpersuaded that Korteland’s diagnosis warranted a downward variance. Specifically, the nature and circumstances of the offense gave the court “grave concern.” Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in balancing the § 3553(a) factors, and we reject Korteland’s contention that the district court failed to account for his history and characteristics. See United States v. Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209, 214-15 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Cooks
589 F.3d 173 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Erik Jenkins
712 F.3d 209 (Fifth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Korteland, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-korteland-ca5-2024.