Rashon Edwards appeals from the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to twenty-four months in prison. On appeal, Edwards asserts that the district court erred when it sentenced him to a term of imprisonment above the term of eight to fourteen months recommended by the sentencing guidelines. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 7B1.4, p.s. (2004). We affirm.

Counsel concedes that the sentencing ranges set forth in Chapter Seven of the guidelines are advisory and non-binding. See United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 640-41 (4th Cir. 1995). Edwards does not suggest that the sentence was not statutorily authorized. Further, it is clear from the record that the recommended guideline range “was within the district court’s contemplation.” See id. at 642. Finally, the district court explained its reasons for imposing the longer sentence. We conclude that the district court exercised its informed discretion by imposing a sentence of twenty-four months.

We accordingly affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED