U.S. v. Long

Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error in sentencing defendant to above-Guideline, 51-month sentence on charge of felon in possession of firearm charge, even though defendant argued that Dist. Ct. improperly based said sentence on need for him to participate in rehabilitation while in prison. Under Tapia, 564 U.S. 319, Dist. Ct. may discuss rehabilitation so long as she does not make rehabilitation primary consideration in deciding either to impose prison sentence or length of said sentence. Moreover, while Dist Ct. made statement that defendant’s sentence would be “long enough” to allow defendant to participate in prison’s rehabilitation programs, fair review of Dist. Ct.’s explanation of defendant’s sentence indicated that length of sentence was primarily based on other factors, such as defendant’s criminal history and seriousness of offense.