Whether Booker's invalidation of the mandatory sentencing regime, and post-Booker neuroscience facts about the adolescent brain constitutes extraordinary and compelling reasons to reduce a pre-Booker mandatory life sentence.

Whether lower courts failure to consider defendant's age from neuroscientific perspective in his Section 3582 (c) (1) (A) motion, and failure to adequately consider other pertinent § 3553 (a) factors constitutes procedural error under Gall v. United States.

Whether Booker's invalidation of the mandatory sentencing regime, and post-Booker neuroscience facts about the adolescent brain constitutes extraordinary and compelling reasons to reduce a pre-Booker mandatory life sentence