DOJ-OGR-00021652.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Paged of 93 lv PAGE POINT IV—The District Court’s Response to a Jury Note Did Not Constructively Amend the Indictment .............02.2002 0 eee eee 66 A. Relevant Facts ................2.--.- 66 B. Applicable Law...................... 70 C. Discussion ..............-2002002000- 71 POINT V—The Sentence Was Procedurally Reasonable...........-..020:e eee eee eee 76 A. Applicable Law..........0......0..0... 76 B. Discussion .................0-02e0 eee 76 WONGLUSION sieiusssem sar maami wim East w SBA 7 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Bochese v. Town of Ponce Inlet, 405 F.3d 964 (11th Cir. 2005) ............... 18 Bridges v. United States, 346 U.S. 209 (1953)... 0.000.000.0000. eee 48 Burgess v. United States, 552 U.S. 124 (2008). .......00..000....0000.0. 45 Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 567 U.S. 142 (2012).....0..0.0.00.0.....00... 45 DOJ-OGR-00021652