Robert R. Davies v. United States

A criminal sentence is a package of sanctions that the district court utilizes to effectuate its sentencing intent, but a district court's original sentencing1- iii .. .,e AIueIiiIIIIeu uy auein uiie pui i.ioII ul the calculus. See Pepper v. United States, 131 S.Ct. 1229, 1251 (2011). If a district court cannot properly determine whether, considering all sentencing factors, including the correct Guidelines range, a sentence is "sufficient, but not greater than necessary," 18 U.S.C. §3553(a), the resulting sentence would not bear the reliability that would support a "presumption of reasonableness" on review. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). And regardless of its ultimate reasonableness, a sentence that lacks reliability because of unjust procedures may well undermine public W .-4' CiLWp1uii UI UAiC iOCCUIiA. JCC i1UOUiC.D Mireles v. United States, 138 S.Ct. 1897, 1903 (2018). The question presented is whether, and to what extent, a sentence that lacks reliability because of unjust procedures satisfies the "interest of justice" prong of 18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(1).