With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". invites an error may not later challenge that error on appeal. Id. As a result, “[wjhere invited error exists, it precludes a court from invoking the plain error rule and reversing.” Id. (quotation omitted). In this case, not only did appellant fail to object to the district court’s imposition of a consecutive sentence, but his attorney agreed with the court that U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) directed the court to impose a consecutive sentence. In short, the invited error doctrine precludes our consideration of the first issue appellant raises. II. A district court commits Booker error if it applies the Guidelines in a mandatory fashion. United States v. Shelton, 400 F.3d 1325, 1330-31 (11th Cir.2005); see also Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (<HOLDING>). While U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) states that any

A: holding that a district courts treatment of the guidelines as mandatory renders a sentence procedurally unreasonable
B: holding that the mere mandatory application of the guidelines  the district courts belief that it was required to impose a guidelines sentence  constitutes error
C: holding that the district courts use of the sentencing guidelines as a mandatory regime was harmless error because appellant could not receive a lesser sentence than the mandatory minimum required by  2251d
D: recognizing that if a guidelines error did not affect the district courts selection of the sentence imposed the sentence should be affirmed
A.