U.S. v. Williams

Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing three-year term of incarceration after finding that defendant had violated terms of his five-year supervised release on drug conspiracy charge, where defendant was caught driving under influence of heroin. While defendant argued that Dist. Ct. committed procedural error during revocation hearing by failing to adequately consider relevant sentencing range recommended by Guidelines policy statements, record showed that Dist. Ct. was aware of and rejected applicable policy statements as starting point in determining defendant’s sentence. Also, Dist. Ct. gave appropriate consideration regarding alleged error in criminal history calculation at defendant’s original sentencing and provided specific reasons for sentence it imposed. As such, Dist. Ct. sufficiently addressed and rejected defendant’s claim that lower suggested sentencing range would have impacted sentence ultimately imposed.