Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to within Sentencing Guidelines, 110-month term of incarceration on charge of unlawful possession of firearm charge, even though defendant argued that Dist. Ct. had failed to consider his request for variance from Guideline range because instant base offense level overrepresented seriousness of his offense because he did not have violent past. Dist. Ct. adequately addressed defendant’s mitigation argument, where it emphasized fact that defendant committed instant offense shortly after being released from prison after his fourth drug-related conviction, and where Dist. Ct. further recognized that downward variance might be justified under certain circumstances, but not in this case. Mover, Dist. Ct. could properly find that: (1) defendant’s criminal history precluded him from obtaining downward variance; and (2) base offense level for Guidelines did not reflect unsound judgment, even when applied to individual without violent past.