Opinion ID: 815314
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Adequate Explanation of Section 3553(a)

Text: Factors Mr. Tavares also maintains that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable because the district court failed to consider the mandatory § 3553(a) factors, especially Mr. Tavares’s -52- background and characteristics. The district court believed that a term of imprisonment of 300 months “fully satisfie[d] the purposes of sentencing.”45 Our review of the record makes clear that the district court considered the mandatory § 3553(a) factors. “While the court ordinarily should identify the main factors upon which it relies, its statement need not be either lengthy or detailed.” United States v. Turbides-Leonardo, 468 F.3d 34, 40 (1st Cir. 2006). We conclude that the district court’s explanation is adequate. The court specifically mentioned Mr. Tavares’s background several times--including his psychological report and family history--the sentences of co-defendants, deterrence and the violent nature of the crimes of conviction.46 Given the record, we must conclude that the district court did not fail to consider the § 3553(a) factors or “fail[] to adequately explain the chosen sentence.” Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. Therefore, we conclude that Mr. Tavares’s sentence was procedurally correct and substantively reasonable.