When reviewing the interpretation of the 'position of trust' enhancement under Sentencing Guideline §3B1.3, does a court of appeals apply a de novo standard of review, as the majority of circuits require, or a clearly erroneous standard, as the Fifth Circuit applies?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Under Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), courts of appeals must review all sentences under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard. The first step of review requires that every federal criminal sentencing begin with a correctly calculated Guidelines range. While a miscalculated Guidelines range is considered a significant procedural error, Gall did not expressly define the standard of review courts of appeals should apply when reviewing the procedural reasonableness of a Guidelines calculation. Different standards of review applied to the interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines result in the inconsistent application of sentencing enhancements and excessive punishment. The question presented is: When reviewing the interpretation of the “position of trust” enhancement under Sentencing Guideline §3B1.3, does a court of appeals apply a de novo standard of review, as the majority of circuits require, or a clearly erroneous standard, as the Fifth Circuit applies? No. In the Supreme Court of the United States STANLEY P. BATES, PETITIONER, V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Petitioner Stanley P. Bates asks that a writ of certiorari issue to review the opinion and judgment entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on March 3, 2020.