Opinion ID: 2982958
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: standard of review

Text: We review a district court’s sentence of imprisonment upon revocation of supervised release “‘under a deferential abuse of discretion standard’ for reasonableness.” United States v. Bolds, 511 F.3d 568, 575 (6th Cir. 2007) (quoting Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007)). But when, as here, defendant is asked whether he has any objections to the proposed sentence pursuant to United States v. Bostic, 371 F.3d 865, 871 (6th Cir. 2004), and fails to object, we 2 review the sentence for plain error. See United States v. Vonner, 516 F.3d 382, 386 (6th Cir. 2008) (en banc). To establish plain error, a defendant must show that the district court (1) made an error, (2) that “was obvious or clear,” (3) that “affected defendant’s substantial rights” and (4) that “affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial proceedings.” Id. (quoting United States v. Gardiner, 463 F.3d 445, 459 (6th Cir. 2006)).