Court Opinion

ID: 9814148
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 23:38:49.400397+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:35:53.277654
License: Public Domain

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I agree with the lead opinion that Hollman’s sentence is both procedurally and substantively reasonable, but I write to highlight one issue. Although the lead opinion does not set forth a standard of review other than abuse of discretion, I would review for plain error the procedural reasonableness of Hollman’s sentence. Though the district court provided Hollman with the opportunity to object to any perceived procedural inadequacy, Hollman *796failed to do so. See, e.g., United States v. Bailey, 488 F.3d 363, 367-68 (6th Cir. 2007). Moreover, as the lead opinion indicates, Hollman failed to raise arguments concerning his mental health problems and low level of education either in his sentencing memorandum or at the sentencing hearing. He should not now be heard to complain about the district court’s failure to address those arguments. Neither Gall nor Rita undermines our court’s precedent of applying the plain error standard of review in the circumstances here.