United States v. Duane Jackson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: June 5, 2026
• Docket: 25-4610
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-4610 Doc: 21 Filed: 06/05/2026 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-4610

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DUANE CURTIS JACKSON, a/k/a Duke,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:20-cr-00024-GMG-RWT-5)

Submitted: March 26, 2026 Decided: June 5, 2026

Before RICHARDSON and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Kristen M. Leddy, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. Lara Kay Omps-Botteicher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-4610 Doc: 21 Filed: 06/05/2026 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Duane Curtis Jackson appeals his 13-month revocation sentence followed by an

additional 12-month term of supervised release. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious

grounds for appeal but questioning the reasonableness of Jackson’s revocation sentence.

Jackson was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he has not done so.

We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for resentencing.

Although counsel questions the reasonableness of Jackson’s revocation sentence,

we need not address this issue because our Anders review disclosed an error under United

States v. Rogers, 961 F.3d 291 (4th Cir. 2020). “Under Rogers, in order to sentence a

defendant to a non-mandatory condition of supervised release, the sentencing court must

include that condition in its oral pronouncement of a defendant’s sentence in open court.”

United States v. Singletary, 984 F.3d 341, 345 (4th Cir. 2021). Rogers errors typically

“involve[] a discretionary condition in the written judgment that was not mentioned at all

during sentencing.” United States v. Mathis, 103 F.4th 193, 197 (4th Cir. 2024).

And that is what happened here. Jackson’s written judgment included 19 standard

conditions and four special conditions of supervised release, but the district court did not

impose any of these discretionary conditions at the revocation hearing.

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have

identified no other potentially meritorious grounds for appeal. We therefore affirm the

district court’s revocation decision, vacate the sentence, and remand for resentencing. See

United States v. Lassiter, 96 F.4th 629, 640 (4th Cir. 2024) (“Our precedents are clear:

2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-4610 Doc: 21 Filed: 06/05/2026 Pg: 3 of 3

When a Rogers error occurs, we must vacate the entire sentence and remand for full

resentencing.”). * This court requires that counsel inform Jackson, in writing, of the right

to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Jackson requests

that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then

counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s

motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Jackson.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED

* We have “suggested that a more limited remedy may be appropriate when the defendant requests it.” Lassiter, 96 F.4th at 640 n.5. After noting the Rogers error, we requested a response from counsel as to whether Jackson seeks resentencing based on the error. Counsel was unable to reach Jackson. Accordingly, because Jackson has not requested a more limited remedy, we vacate the entire sentence and remand for resentencing.