I. Whether it was procedurally and substantively reasonable for the
sentencing court to a) recite statutory sentencing rationale by rote
recitation without adequate explanation and without adequate
correlation with Mr. McKenna's individual characteristics; b)
misapprehend the defense presentation at sentencing; and c) steer the
government away from a low sentencing recommendation.

II. Whether Robert McKenna's request to have the First Circuit review
his appeal absent summary dismissal was appropriately addressed
using an "abuse of discretion" standard.

Whether the First Circuit Court of Appeals erred in finding that the defendant's sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable under 18 USC § 3553(a) and (c)(1) when the district court's explanation was inadequate and failed to properly consider the sentencing factors