Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
No. 10-4484
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (1:09-cr-00480-GBL-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Carlos
eight-month
Eduardo
prison
Fuentes-Ramirez
sentence
for
one
appeals
count
of
his
forty-
illegally
re-
Fuentes-
the
district
individualized
hearing.
assessment
review
discretion standard.
for
on
the
to
adequately
record
at
place
the
an
sentencing
sentence
under
deferential
abuse-of-
procedural
court
failed
(2007).
court
reasonableness
committed
no
by
significant
ensuring
that
procedural
the
errors,
district
such
as
(4th
Cir.
2010).
We
then
consider
the
substantive
of
the
circumstances.
Gall,
552
U.S.
at
51.
On
F.3d
375,
379
(4th
Cir.
When
sentencing,
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted).
a
correctly
calculate
the
thereafter
give
parties
whatever
the
sentence
they
district
applicable
the
deem
court
should
Guidelines
opportunity
appropriate.
range
to
and
argue
United
first
for
States
v.
The sentencing
See id. at
270-71.
imposing
The
district
courts
explanation
for
has
reasoned
basis
for
exercising
[its]
own
legal
decisionmaking authority.
But when a
Rita, 551
U.S. at 356.
Fuentes-Ramirez
courts
explanation
explanation
therefore
explanation
could
not
an
failed
was
apply
argues
on
deficient
to
many
individualized
to
address
appeal
in
two
other
that
district
respects:
(1)
the
defendants
and
was
(2)
the
argument
that
assessment;
Fuentes-Ramirezs
4
the
and
it
elevated
history
under
the
both
U.S.
his
offense
Sentencing
level
and
Guidelines
his
criminal
Manual
(2009).
the
district
courts
explanation
of
its
reasons
for
defendants
does
not
defeat
the
It is just these
is
imposednecessitate
because
guidelines
sentences
less
extensive
themselves
are
explanation
in
many
ways
close
States v.
attention
denied,
Johnson,
Martin
v.
to
587
federal
F.3d
United
sentencing
625,
States,
639
(4th
130
S.
policy.
United
Cir.
2009),
Ct.
2128
cert.
(2010),
generic,
universally-applicable
5
recitation
we
found
2009).
It
was
offense-specific,
made
mention
of
the
history.
district
court
is
not
required
to
to
the
judges
own
judgment.).
The
mooted,
or
at
the
least
substantially
lessened,
silence
render
on
this
contention
does
not
the
sentence
unreasonable.
We therefore affirm the district courts judgment.
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
We
legal
AFFIRMED