Case Explained: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DARYL SMITH

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-05 The Fourth Circuit affirmed Daryl Smith’s 120-month sentence for distributing cocaine base under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). The court held that the Government did not breach its plea agreement by characterizing Smith’s criminal history as “understated” during sentencing advocacy. Because Smith failed to object to this conduct at the district court level, the appellate court applied the plain error standard of review. Under this standard, an error must be clear or obvious to warrant reversal. The court reasoned that the Government fulfilled its contractual obligation by recommending a sentence within the guideline range and was expressly permitted by the plea agreement to respond to statements made by the defendant or his counsel regarding criminal history. Consequently, Smith’s claim that the Government impliedly advocated for an upward variance was not plain error, and the judgment of the district court remains in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.