Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 160-month term of incarceration on wire fraud charge stemming from scheme in which defendant stole $700,000 from clients, who had set aside said funds for medical expenses. While defendant argued that said sentence was unreasonable in light of his mitigation and in light of fact that co-defendant, who appropriated $6 million in said funds, received 180-month term of incarceration, Dist. Ct. could properly impose instant below-guideline sentence given serious nature of underlying crime, and given defendant’s choice of victims. Moreover, Dist. Ct. adequately addressed defendant’s mitigation evidence.