Teacher:In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? Solve this instance: to calculate and consider the applicable guideline range as well as the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.A. 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2006). Id. If the sentence imposed is within the properly calculated guideline range, it is presumptively reasonable. United States v. Green, 436 F.3d 449, 456 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 2309, 164 L.Ed.2d 828 (2006). Thomas' sentence was both within the guideline range of 262-327 months and within the statutory maximum of life imprisonment. See 21 U.S.C. 841(b) (2000). Because the district court appropriately treated the guidelines as advisory, and properly calculated and considered the guideline range and the relevant 3553(a) factors, we find the sentence reasonable. See United States v. Eura, 440 F.3d 625, 632 (4th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm Thomas' sentence. We
Holding statements: (A) holding that a district court does not have to state on the record that it considered every 3553a factor (B) holding that the district court is not required to state on the record that it has explicitly considered each of the 3553a factors or to discuss each of the 3553a factors (C) holding that sentence is reasonable when the district court properly addresses sentencing factors of 3553a (D) holding that to establish reasonableness of a sentence a district court need not explicitly discuss every 3553a factor on the record (E) holding that nothing in booker or elsewhere requires the district court to state on the record that it has explicitly considered each of the 3553a factors or to discuss each of the 3553a factors
Student:
holding that a district court does not have to state on the record that it considered every 3553a factor