Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error in sentencing defendant to concurrent sentences of 24-months and 17-months on two counts of his original drug-related conviction, where defendant had violated for second time term of his supervised release by leaving jurisdiction without permission for period of seven months. Instant 24-month sentence was not unreasonable, even though applicable guideline range for instant violation of supervised release was five-to-eleven-months term of incarceration, where Dist. Ct. adequately explained that instant sentence was justified based on defendant’s extensive criminal history, his repeated violations of supervised release, and likelihood that defendant would re-offend in future. Moreover, even if Dist. Ct. lacked authority to impose consecutive 17-month sentence due to instant violation of single term of supervised release, defendant is not entitled to relief under plain error standard, where defendant could not show that imposition of lesser concurrent sentence affected length of his imprisonment on instant 24-month sentence.
