Tenth Circuit finds reasonable giving the guidelines "considerable weight"

Providing an account of what the Supreme Court's Booker progeny means for district courts, the Tenth Circuit yesterday in US v. Zamora-Solorzano, No. 07-3205 (10th Cir. May 13, 2008) (available here) affirms a within-guideline sentence after the district court indicated it had given the guidelines "considerable weight." Here is a key passage from the ruling in Zamora-Solorzano:

To begin, Rita simply held that “the sentencing court does not enjoy the benefit of a legal presumption that the Guidelines sentence should apply.” Rita, 127 S. Ct. at 2465 (emphasis added).  Similarly, we have explained that a district court is not required to give heightened consideration to the Guidelines as a matter of course. See United States v. Smart, 518 F.3d 800, 808 (10th Cir. 2008).  On the other hand, “gravitational pull [towards a Guidelines sentence at the district court level] that reduces sentencing disparity — so long as it does not rise to the level of mandate — is neither unconstitutional nor undesirable.”  United States v. Angel-Guzman, 506 F.3d 1007, 1014 (10th Cir. 2007) (emphasis added).  Thus, neither Rita nor our case law suggests that a district court is precluded from, in its individualized judgment, attributing considerable weight to a Guidelines sentence in a given case.