Rita v. United States

Rita (defendant) was convicted of obstructing a federal investigation, and the sentencing judge, after considering a presentence report and both parties' arguments, imposed the minimum sentence under the applicable Sentencing Guidelines. Rita appealed, arguing the sentence was unreasonable because it ignored his personal history and character and was excessive relative to federal sentencing goals; the court of appeals, applying a presumption of reasonableness to within-Guidelines sentences, upheld the sentence.