Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit erroneously speculated that the District Court would have imposed the same sentence on a criminal defendant even when faced with a drastic reduction in the applicable Guidelines range

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit erroneously speculated — in conflict with the principles enunciated by this Court in Volina-Martinez v. United States, 578 U.S. __, 1868. Ct. 1838, 194 L. Ed. 2d 444 (2016) and Peugh v. United States, 569 U.S. 530 (2013) and with the approach taken by the Third and Seventh Circuits — that the District Court would have imposed the same sentence on a criminal defendant even when faced with a drastic reduction in the applicable Guidelines range that formed the starting point, anchor and framework of its sentencing decision.