IN 1974, IN DORSZYNSKI V. UNITED STATES, THE SUPREME COURT, WHILE AGREEING THAT AN EXPRESS NO BENEFIT FINDING WAS REQUIRED UNDER THE ACT BEFORE ADULT SENTENCE CAN BE IMPOSED, AFFIRMED THE VIRTUALLY UNFETTERED DISCRETION OF THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS IN SENTENCING. THIS NOTE EXAMINES APPELLATE REVIEW OF FYCA SENTENCES BEFORE AND AFTER THE WATERSHED DECISION OF DORSZYNSKI, ANALYZING THE VARIOUS TECHNIQUES EMPLOYED BY APPELLATE COURTS TO SCRUTINIZE THE DISTRICT COURT'S EXERCISE OF ITS DISCRETIONARY SENTENCING POWER. GROUNDS FOR APPELLATE REVIEW OF SENTENCES BEFORE DORSZYNSKI INCLUDED ABUSE OF DISCRETION OR FAILURE TO EXERCISE DISCRETION IN SENTENCING, MECHANICAL IMPOSITION OF SENTENCES, AND FAILURE TO MAKE SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF NO BENEFIT. AFTER DORSZYNSKI, APPELLATE REVIEW WAS LIMITED TO CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS IN SENTENCING AND ABUSE OF DISCRETION.