Defendant must object in district court to reasonableness of method by which sentence is calculated to avoid plain error review of claim on appeal

SENTENCING United States v. Lopez-Flores, No. 05-2274, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Apr. 18, 2006)(New Mexico). Appeal of sentence for illegal reentry to United States by deported alien following conviction for aggravated battery in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)(1), (2) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). HELD: (1) Reasonableness standard of review set forth in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), necessarily encompasses both reasonableness of length of sentence, as well as method by which sentence is calculated. Where defendant fails to object on reasonableness grounds to method by which sentence is determined, alleged sentencing error is reviewed for plain error only. (2) If defendant does not raise substantial contentions concerning non-guidelines sentencing factors set out in 18 U.S.C.§ 3553(a) and district court imposes sentence within guidelines range, Booker does not require district court to explain on record how § 3553(a) factors justify sentence. Read the opinion here.