What standard of review should apply when a district court applies a federal sentencing guideline to undisputed facts?

This case presents an important and long-standing question of appellate review that has divided the circuits and impacts countless defendants: What standard of review should apply when a district court applies a federal sentencing guideline to undisputed facts? In Buford v. United States , 532 U.S. 59 (2001) , this Court interpreted the “due deference” language in 18 U.S.C. § 3742(e) to require a deferential standard of review. But in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005) , this Court excised § 3742(e) when it made the Sentencing Guidelines advisory. Since then, the circuits have taken different views on whether § 3742(e) continues to require deferential review or whether de novo review applies. The proper standard of review is a question of exceptional importance, and this case presents an ideal opportunity for the Court to provide much -needed clarity.