What is the test for a federal district judge to explain a sentence in open court?

We review sentencing determinations for both substantive and procedural reasonableness. United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180, 189-90 (2d Cir. 2008) (en banc). Under 3553(c), the district court is required to "state in open court the reasons for its imposition of the particular sentence," and must do so "at the time of sentencing . . . ." 18 U.S.C. 3553(c). Although there is no requirement that a district judge "provide lengthy or elaborate explanations" for its sentencing decision, United States v. Genao, 869 F.3d 136, 142 (2d Cir. 2017), the court "must adequately explain the chosen sentence to allow for meaningful appellate review and to promote the perception of fair sentencing," Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 50 (2007). Indeed, "the defendant, the public, and appellate courts should not be required to engage in guesswork about the rationale for a particular sentence." Genao, 869 F.3d at 142. We have excused a district court's failure to explain a sentence only where the district court adopts "the presentence investigation report in open court and the factual findings in the report are adequate to support the

Page 9