context: We doubt that Mills's sentence was imposed in a procedurally unreasonable manner.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 502 F.3d 204, 210
citation_a.parenthetical: stating that although "[n]on-frivolous arguments for a non-Guidelines sentence" may require some discussion, "we do not insist that the district court address every argument the defendant has made or discuss every SS 3553(a
citation_a.sentence: See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (“The sentencing judge should set forth [reasoning] enough to satisfy the appellate court that he has considered the parties’ arguments and has a reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decision-making authority.”); see also United States v. Villafuerte, 502 F.3d 204, 210 (2d Cir.2007) (stating that although “[n]on-frivolous arguments fór a non-Guidelines sentence” may require some discussion, “we do not insist that the district court address every argument the defendant has made or discuss every § 3553(a) factor individually”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468
citation_b.parenthetical: "The sentencing judge should set forth [reasoning] enough to satisfy the appellate court that he has considered the parties' arguments and has a reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decision-making authority."
citation_b.sentence: See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (“The sentencing judge should set forth [reasoning] enough to satisfy the appellate court that he has considered the parties’ arguments and has a reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decision-making authority.”); see also United States v. Villafuerte, 502 F.3d 204, 210 (2d Cir.2007) (stating that although “[n]on-frivolous arguments fór a non-Guidelines sentence” may require some discussion, “we do not insist that the district court address every argument the defendant has made or discuss every § 3553(a) factor individually”).