1) Whether the materiality analysis from Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), which has developed almost entirely around proceedings with binary outcomes like trials or capital sentencing, sufficiently satisfies due process when applied by lower courts analyzing federal sentencing decisions post-United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005)?

2) Whether a district court complies with its procedural obligations under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and Booker when it adopts unqualified and contradictory findings in crafting a defendant's criminal sentence?

Whether the materiality analysis from Brady v. Maryland sufficiently satisfies due process when applied to federal sentencing decisions post-Booker