Gary Craig Stephens v. United States

The Sentencing Guidelines remain “the starting point and the initial benchmark” for all federal sentencing proceedings. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49 (2007). A district court’s failure to calculate the applicable Guidelines range constitutes procedural error. Peugh v. United States, 569 U.S. 530, 537 (2013); Rosales-Mireles v. United States, 585 U.S. 129, 134 (2018). In this case, the district court imposed a 24-month supervised release revocation sentence—more than double the high end of the correct range—without ever calculating or identifying the applicable Guidelines range. The court of appeals nonetheless affirmed in an unpublished memorandum decision. The questions presented are:

1. Whether a court of appeals may affirm a sentence when the district court never calculated or identified the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range, notwithstanding this Court’s repeated holdings that Guidelines calculation is the mandatory starting point for sentencing and that failure to do so constitutes procedural error.

2. Whether a sentence may be affirmed on plain-error review where the district court imposed a sentence more than double the high end of the applicable Guidelines range without any explanation tethered to a calculated range. prefix