Opinion ID: 170966
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Discrepancy Between Guidelines and Statutory Penalty

Text: Ms. Tyler contends that the district court's sentence is presumptively unreasonable because application of the enhancements far exceed the potential punishment Congress intended to impose for [her] offense. Tyler Br. at 43. She further contends that [i]f the maximum penalty by statute is 20 years and yet the guidelines sentence is life, then it seems that guidelines are presumptively unreasonable since they more than triple the punishment authorized by statute. [1] Id. We disagree. To begin with, Ms. Tyler's sentence (on her conviction of three offenses, not just the attempted murder) is 60 years, not life. More importantly, there is nothing presumptively unreasonable about imposing consecutive sentences to reach a sentence within the Guidelines range. On the contrary, a sentence within the Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Kristl, 437 F.3d 1050, 1055 (10th Cir.2006). Of course, if the Guidelines range exceeds the statutory maximum, the statute must prevail. But if the defendant has been convicted of several offenses, it is hardly unreasonable to stack the statutory sentences to reach a presumptively reasonable Guidelines sentence. See USSG § 5G1.2(d) (providing for consecutive sentences to produce combined sentence equal to advisory Guidelines sentence). We discern no error.