Case Explained: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. KEVLIN JERROD JACKSON

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-24 The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment revoking Kevlin Jerrod Jackson’s supervised release and imposing a sentence of eight months’ imprisonment. The court applied the standard that a revocation sentence is valid if it is within the statutory maximum and not plainly unreasonable, requiring a determination of whether any procedural or substantive unreasonableness is clear or obvious. The panel found the sentence procedurally reasonable because the district court correctly calculated the nonbinding Sentencing Guidelines policy statement range of four to ten months, engaged the parties in discussion regarding the violations, and considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The sentence was deemed substantively reasonable as it fell within the recommended policy statement range, creating a presumption of reasonableness that Jackson failed to overcome by demonstrating any contrary factors. Additionally, the court reviewed the record pursuant to *Anders v. California* following counsel’s filing of an *Anders* brief asserting no meritorious grounds for appeal, concluding that no such grounds existed and directing counsel to inform the appellant of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.