Opinion ID: 2977244
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Appellate Review of Sentence

Text: “Sentences imposed post-Booker are reviewed for procedural and substantive reasonableness.” United States v. Conatser, 514 F.3d 508, 519 (6th Cir. 2008) (citing United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261 (2005); United States v. Williams, 432 F.3d 621, 623 (6th Cir. 2005)). We “must first ensure that the district court committed no significant procedural error, such as failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the § 3553(a) factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence—including an explanation for any deviation from the Guidelines range.” Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007). If procedurally sound, we then review the sentence for substantive reasonableness under an abuse-ofdiscretion standard. Id. at 598; see also Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2465 (2007).