U.S. v. Bell

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 98-month term of incarceration followed by three-year term of supervised release, even though defendant argued that Dist. Ct. failed to make explicit Guidelines calculation for his term of supervised release. Explicit announcement by Dist. Ct. of Guidelines recommendation for supervised release is not required, and record showed that Dist. Ct. otherwise made numerous references to presentence report that contained Guidelines calculation for supervised release and explicitly adopted Guidelines calculation contained in said report. Also, Dist. Ct. appropriately considered Guidelines’ departure provision/policy statements during its section 3553(a) analysis and considered defendant’s mitigation arguments, even though it did not find them to be persuasive.