United States v. Ward, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 22441

Ward, a former Penn professor, pled guilty to five counts involving sexual exploitation of minors and false statements to obtain a U.S. visa.
He maintained a house in Fortaleza, Brazil, where he housed J.D., J.D.'s mother, and other boys during 2006 and engaged in sexual activity with J.D. there and in the United States.
Ward coerced J.D. via emails to participate in a
growth program

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Second-victim enhancement validity	Ward argues the district court erred by applying the second-victim enhancement.	Ward contends more than one victim should not trigger the enhancement here.	Enhancement properly applied; multiple victims shown.
General sentence on multiple counts	Ward contends the court imposed a single general sentence rather than count-specific sentences.	Ward argues this general sentence could be illegal given varying statutory maxima.	Sentence on counts was improper; remand to specify sentences per count.
Fine versus restitution	Ward challenges the imposition of a $100,000 fine instead of restitution.	Ward notes restitution issues and seeks restitution to victims rather than a government fine.	Fine imposed for restitution error; not plain error, remand not required.

United States v. Tomko, 562 F.3d 558 (3d Cir. 2009) (en banc framework for reviewing sentencing procedures)
United States v. Brown, 595 F.3d 498 (3d Cir. 2010) (de novo review of legal rulings and procedural sentencing issues)
United States v. Moriarty, 429 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir. 2005) (remand for clarification of sentence on multi-count conviction)
United States v. Hall, 610 F.3d 727 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (reassignment of sentences per count on remand)
United States v. Vitillo, 490 F.3d 314 (3d Cir. 2007) (restitution limitations and analysis)
United States v. Pfaff, 619 F.3d 172 (2d Cir. 2010) (plain error standard for fines when restitution not objected to)