Is a sentence imposed under the methamphetamine sentencing guideline –a guideline crafted without benefit of Sentencing Commission expertise or empirical basis –entitled to a presumption of reasonableness? The Fifth Circuit concluded as much. But its basis for doing so –that a guideline enjoys a presumption of reasonableness regardless of its lack of empirical basis or its promulgation without benefit of Sentencin g Commission expertise– conflicts with the Second Circuit's approach to review of sentences under such a guideline.

Is a sentence imposed under the methamphetamine sentencing guideline-a guideline crafted without benefit of Sentencing Commission expertise or empirical basis—entitled to a presumption of reasonableness?