Opinion ID: 3197058
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: National Disparity.

Text: Citing 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6), the appellant next argues that his sentence was disproportionate to others found guilty of the same or similar conduct. This argument is unpersuasive. Section 3553(a)(6) instructs a sentencing court to consider the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct. This provision is aimed, generally, at the minimization of sentencing disparities among defendants nationwide. See Martin, 520 F.3d at 94. Because the appellant did not raise this claim of error below, our review is for plain error. See Duarte, 246 F.3d at 60. We see nothing resembling plain error here. The appellant presents this argument in hortatory terms without developing any relevant factual foundation. The lack of developed argumentation is fatal to the claim. See United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir. 1990) ([I]ssues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived.).