Branch

MEMORANDUM *

James Branch appeals his 200-month sentence, contending that the sentence is unreasonable because it does not sufficiently take into account his abusive childhood. The Government contends that we do not have jurisdiction to review his sentence and argues in the alternative that the sentence is reasonable. Branch also contends that the judgment incorrectly reflects the charges and conviction and requests that we remand the case to the district court to correct the judgment. We hold that we have jurisdiction to review the sentence and that the sentence is reasonable. However, we remand the case to the district court to correct the judgment.

Discussion

I. Sentencing

The district court relied on 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) to impose a sentence below the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range. Branch does not claim that there was an error in calculating the Guidelines range, but contends that the 200-month sentence is unreasonable. Although the sentence is below the calculated Guidelines range, Branch argues that it should be even lower.

We engage in a two-step process for reviewing sentences imposed after the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220…