the district court to consider the need for the sentence imposed— (A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; (B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and (D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner.... 3 . I agree with the majority that the district court did not err when it ordered restitution. I also agree that the district court committed no procedural error — substantive unreasona-bility not being "procedural” — when it sentenced Edwards. 4 . See, e.g., United States v. Livesay, 587 F.3d 1274, 1278-79 (11th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>); United Stales v. Omole, 523 F.3d 691, 698-700
holding that total punishment is the precise sentence determined by the sentencing judge from within the appropriate guidelines range and affirming a 63month sentence where a jury convicted defendant of five counts each with a 60month statutory maximum where the guideline range was 51 to 63 months holding that rule 36 may not be used by the district court to fundamentally alter the defendants sentence from three to five years imprisonment in an attempt to conform the sentence to the intention of the parties as reflected in the plea agreement which provided that the prisoner would serve exactly five years holding that a sentence of twelve months imprisonment was unreasonably lenient where the defendant engaged in wire fraud and caused 90000 in losses and the guidelines range was sixtythree to seventyeight months imprisonment holding that a sentence of seven days imprisonment was substantively unreasonable where the defendant participated in a securities fraud conspiracy that caused more than 1 billion in losses holding that a sentence of five years probation was unreasonably lenient where the defendant played a key role in an accounting fraud scheme that caused over 1 billion in losses to a companys shareholders and the guidelines range was seventyeight to ninetyseven months imprisonment