A criminal sentence is a package of sanctions that
the district court utilizes to effectuate its sentencing
intent, but a district court's original sentencing
intent may be undermined by altering one portion of
the calculus. See Pepper U. United States, 131 S.Ct.
1229, 1251 (2011). If a district court cannot properly
determine whether, considering all sentencing
factors, including the correct Guidelines range, a
is
"sufficient, but not greater than
sentence
necessary,"
18 U.S.C.
$3553(a),
the resulting
sentence would not bear the reliability that would
support a "presumption of reasonableness" on
review. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51
(2007).
And
regardless
of
its
ultimate
reasonableness, a sentence that lacks reliability
because of unjust procedures may well undermine
public perception of the proceedings. See RosalesMireles v. United States, 138 S.Ct. 1897, 1903 (2018).
The question presented is whether, and to what
extent, a sentence that lacks reliability because of
unjust procedures satisfies the "interest of justice"
prong of 18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(1).

Whether a sentence that lacks reliability because of unjust procedures satisfies the 'interest of justice' prong of 18 U.S.C. §3583(e)(1)