Whether a defendant should receive an increased sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3A1.3 for having 'physically restrained' a victim, where the conduct at issue is nothing like the narrow examples the Guidelines use to define that term, such as 'the victim . . . being tied, bound, or locked up'?

QUESTION PRESENTED The Sentencing Guidelines provide for an enhancement when “a victim was physically restrained in the course of the offense.” But while the Guidelines define ‘physically restrained’ by way of narrow examples such as “the victim . . . being tied, bound, or locked up,” the Tenth Circuit has long countenanced an interpretation of that definition that is, by its own recognition, “very broad[]” and inconsistent with the approach taken by other circuits. Because the Tenth Circuit’s interpretation is contrary both to the approach taken by other circuits and divorced from the plain text of the Guidelines, and also because the Sentencing Commission has allowed this circuit split to fester for decades, this Court should grant certiorari to address the following question: Whether a defendant should receive an increased sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3A1.3 for having “physically restrained” a victim, where the conduct at issue is nothing like the narrow examples the Guidelines use to define that term, such as “the victim . . . being tied, bound, or locked up”? i