on the twelve-month sentence, the district judge extensively reviewed Smith’s history and his conduct while on supervised release. R5 at 19-20. The judge also noted the seriousness of Smith’s underlying offense and that the sentence of twelve months of imprisonment was appropriate in light of the repetitiveness of Smith’s conduct. The judge further stated: “All I can do is remove you right now, hope to protect society for the period of time that you are on release.” Id. at 22. Given the district judge’s consideration of the nature and circumstances of Smith’s offense, Smith’s history and conduct while on supervised release, and the need to protect society, it cannot be said that she did not consider the § 3553(a) factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); see also Scott, 426 F.3d at 1329 (<HOLDING>). Because the district judge considered the
holding that to establish reasonableness of a sentence a district court need not explicitly discuss every  3553a factor on the record recognizing that many of the  3553a factors are already incorporated into any guidelines determination and the  3553a factors can themselves overlap holding a sentencing court is not obligated to expressly weigh on the record each of the factors set out in  3553a holding that a district court does not have to state on the record that it considered every  3553a factor holding that the district court is not required to state on the record that it has explicitly considered each of the  3553a factors or to discuss each of the  3553a factors