(b)
Appeal by the Government.—
The Government may file a notice of appeal in the district court for review of an otherwise final sentence if the sentence—
(1)
was imposed in violation of law;
(2)
was imposed as a result of an incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines;
(3)
is less than the sentence specified in the applicable guideline range to the extent that the sentence includes a lesser fine or term of imprisonment, probation, or supervised release than the minimum established in the guideline range, or includes a less limiting condition of probation or supervised release under section
3563
(b)(6) or (b)(11) than the minimum established in the guideline range; or
(4)
was imposed for an offense for which there is no sentencing guideline and is plainly unreasonable.
The Government may not further prosecute such appeal without the personal approval of the Attorney General, the Solicitor General, or a deputy solicitor general designated by the Solicitor General.
(e)
Consideration.—
Upon review of the record, the court of appeals shall determine whether the sentence—
(1)
was imposed in violation of law;
(2)
was imposed as a result of an incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines;
(3)
is outside the applicable guideline range, and
(A)
the district court failed to provide the written statement of reasons required by section
3553
(c);
(B)
the sentence departs from the applicable guideline range based on a factor that—
(i)
does not advance the objectives set forth in section
3553
(a)(2); or
(ii)
is not authorized under section
3553
(b); or
(iii)
is not justified by the facts of the case; or
(C)
the sentence departs to an unreasonable degree from the applicable guidelines range, having regard for the factors to be considered in imposing a sentence, as set forth in section
3553
(a) of this title and the reasons for the imposition of the particular sentence, as stated by the district court pursuant to the provisions of section
3553
(c); or
(4)
was imposed for an offense for which there is no applicable sentencing guideline and is plainly unreasonable.
The court of appeals shall give due regard to the opportunity of the district court to judge the credibility of the witnesses, and shall accept the findings of fact of the district court unless they are clearly erroneous and, except with respect to determinations under subsection (3)(A) or (3)(B), shall give due deference to the district court’s application of the guidelines to the facts. With respect to determinations under subsection (3)(A) or (3)(B), the court of appeals shall review de novo the district court’s application of the guidelines to the facts.