A small sampling of our precedent shows that the 14-month variance falls well within the range of upward variances that we have upheld. See id. at *3, *7 (22-month variance up to a 63-month sentence); United States v. Zabel, 35 F.4th 493, 507-08 (6th Cir. 2022) (6-month variance up to an 18-month sentence); United States v. Reese, 2022 WL 612807, at *12 (6th Cir. Mar. 2, 2022) (8-month variance up to an 18-month sentence); United States v. Day, 2022 WL 523564, at *2 (6th Cir. Feb. 22, 2022) (10-month variance up to a 24-month sentence); United States v. Gray, 2021 WL 4963366, at *7 (6th Cir. Oct. 26, 2021) (25-month variance up to a 96-month sentence); United States v. Wilson, 2021 WL 3017276, at *1-4 (6th Cir. July 16, 2021) (10-month variance up to a 51-month sentence); McClain, 858 Fed.Appx. at 906 (8-month variance up to a 65-month sentence); United States v. Cechini, 834 Fed.Appx. 201, 205-06 (6th Cir. 2020) (21-month variance up to a 54-month sentence); United States v. Dunnican, 961 F.3d 859, 880-81 (6th Cir. 2020) (21-month variance up to an 84-month sentence); United States v. Williams, 807 Fed.Appx. 505, 509 (6th Cir. 2020) (20-month variance up to a 36-month sentence); United States v. Williams, 664 Fed.Appx. 517, 51920 (6th Cir. 2016) (27-month variance up to a 60-month sentence).

First, we have held that it is not an abuse of discretion for a district court to impose a sentence with an upward variance "in light of the leniency in trust the court had [previously] extended." United States v. Johnson, 640 F.3d 195, 204 (6th Cir. 2011); United States v. Day, No. 21-3272, 2022 WL 523564, at *3 (6th Cir. Feb. 22, 2022) (affirming the district court's statutory maximum sentence of two years and noting "the district court's earlier leniency").