Case Explained: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BRANDON SOLOMON

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-23 The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment imposing a 235-month sentence on Brandon Solomon for distribution of methamphetamine and fentanyl in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B). The court held that the sentence was procedurally reasonable under an abuse-of-discretion standard, rejecting Solomon’s claim that the district court failed to consider his nonfrivolous arguments for a downward variance regarding his lack of a father figure and teenage drug use and gunshot wound. The court applied the standard requiring a district court to address or consider all non-frivolous reasons presented for a different sentence and explain why they were rejected. The Fourth Circuit concluded that no error occurred because the district court had already considered Solomon’s history of drug use by ordering drug testing to facilitate substance abuse treatment and interpreted his upbringing as “good” based on the presentence report, despite noting the absence of a father figure. Furthermore, the court found it reasonable for the district court to omit specific discussion of these mitigating factors because Solomon only briefly mentioned them in his sentencing memorandum, failed to raise them during the sentencing hearing, and did not explain how they supported a downward variance. The district court’s explanation that a lengthy sentence was necessary to deter criminal conduct and protect the community satisfied the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). As a result, the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia is affirmed, and Solomon remains subject to the imposed sentence without oral argument. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.