Opinion ID: 689641
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sentencing Within the Applicable Guidelines

Text: 13 Pulliam argues the district court erred by sentencing him to a 220 month term of imprisonment because that term was greater than necessary. Pulliam cites 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(a) which states [t]he Court shall impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary to comply with the purposes set forth in paragraph 2 of this subsection. Pulliam also cites a statement by the district court judge during the sentencing hearing that he normally pick[s] a sentence right in the middle and then [tries] to decide whether ... to go up or down from there. He argues the judge should impose only a sufficient sentence and that his statement was an improper assumption on how to apply the guidelines. 14 These arguments by Pulliam are frivolous. A sentence within the appropriate guidelines is not appealable. United States v. Lovins, 993 F.2d 1244, 1245 (6th Cir.1993). Pulliam does not dispute that, given the determination he is an armed career criminal, the appropriate guideline range is level 31, criminal history category VI. Pulliam was sentenced within the appropriate guidelines and thus the district court did not err.