Opinion ID: 145470
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Statman's Sentence

Text: During Statman's sentencing hearing, the district court stated it would consider the factors in 18 United States Code Section 3553 and the sentencing guidelines. The district court accurately calculated Statman's Guidelines range, finding, based upon Statman's offense level of 19 and criminal history category of I, Statman's Guidelines range was 30 to 37 months imprisonment. The district court provided Statman with an opportunity to argue for his desired sentence. Statman's counsel asked for a sentence that does not involve incarceration, citing Statman's advanced age (69) and physical impairments. The district court reviewed the medical documentation Statman's counsel provided, and indicated they have real good medical facilities in the Federal Correction Institution, so ... unless someone is in a steep dive with regard to their health, I go ahead and let them be treated in the institution. The district court sentenced Statman to 33 months imprisonment and three years supervised release, and ordered Statman to make joint and several restitution in the amount of $1,740,073.51. Statman argues the district court procedurally erred by fail[ing] to explain its reasons for the sentence. However, [n]othing in § 3553(a) or in the Booker [4] remedy opinion requires `robotic incantations' that each statutory factor has been considered. United States v. Lamoreaux, 422 F.3d 750, 756 (8th Cir.2005) (quoting United States v. Crosby, 397 F.3d 103, 113 (2d Cir.2005) (rejected on other grounds by United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543, 552 (8th Cir.2005) (en banc))). We are satisfied the district court `considered [Statman's] arguments and ha[d] a reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decisionmaking authority.' Robinson, 516 F.3d at 718 (quoting Rita, 551 U.S. at 356, 127 S.Ct. 2456). We therefore find no procedural error as to Statman's sentence.