Opinion ID: 795956
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Seymour's sentence

Text: 54 Finally, Seymour challenges the reasonableness of his 262-month sentence. He argues that the district court glossed over many of the factors listed in § 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) and failed to give reasoned consideration to the psychological issues raised in the PSR. 55 We review de novo the district court's application of the Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Corrado, 304 F.3d 593, 607 (6th Cir.2002). When a defendant challenges a district court's sentence pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), the sentence is reviewed for reasonableness. United States v. Webb, 403 F.3d 373, 383 (6th Cir.2005). Reasonableness review requires us to consider both the length of the sentence and the factors evaluated and the procedures employed by the district court in reaching its sentencing determination. Id. The review thus encompasses substantive as well as procedural reasonableness. United States v. McBride, 434 F.3d 470, 476 n. 3 (6th Cir.2006) (holding that there are both substantive and procedural components to our reasonableness review) (emphasis in original). 56 In determining the particular sentence to be imposed, courts must consider: 57 (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; 58 (2) the need for the sentence imposed— 59 (A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; 60 (B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; 61 (C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and 62 (D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; 63 (3) the kinds of sentences available; 64 (4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for— 65 (A) the applicable category of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the guidelines— 66 ... 67 (5) any pertinent policy statement— 68 (A) issued by the Sentencing Commission 69 ... 70 (6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; and 71 (7) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense. 72 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). 73 The district court acknowledged the now-advisory nature of the Guidelines and that it must consider the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Based on Seymour's criminal history, the need for deterrence, and the need to reflect the seriousness of the crimes for which Seymour was convicted, the district court sentenced Seymour at the top of the applicable Guidelines range. This Guidelines sentence is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Richardson, 437 F.3d 550, 553-54 (6th Cir. 2006) (citations and quotation marks omitted). 74 Seymour argues, however, that the district court did not consider Seymour's painful family history and emotional problems, and that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court, however, in fact demonstrated that it was aware of Seymour's psychological impairments when it recommended that Mr. Seymour be afforded appropriate mental health sex offender ... treatment, as well as participation in the Bureau of Prisons 500 hour intensive substance abuse program. In addition, the Sentencing Commission has stated that mental health issues, drugs, and an underprivileged upbringing are not ordinarily relevant in determining whether to render a below-Guidelines sentence, U.S.S.G. §§ 5H1.3, 5H1.4, 5H1.12, and that district courts must take into account such Sentencing Commission policies under § 3553(a)(5). We conclude that the district court adequately articulated its reasoning for sentencing Seymour to 262 months of imprisonment, and that his sentence reflects a reasonable consideration of the § 3553(a) factors.