Case Explained: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MARVIN RASHAAD CUMMINGS

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-11 The Fourth Circuit affirmed the defendant’s conviction and sentence, holding that a district court’s mistaken advisement regarding the mandatory minimum sentence for a firearm count during a Rule 11 plea hearing did not warrant reversal under the plain error standard. The court applied the four-prong test from *United States v. Olano*, 507 U.S. 725 (1993), concluding that while the district court committed an error by stating the statutory minimum was seven years instead of twenty-five, the defendant failed to demonstrate that this error affected his substantial rights. The record showed that the defendant explicitly confirmed he understood the twenty-five-year minimum during the plea hearing, signed a written plea agreement acknowledging the 25-year term, and raised no objections in the presentence report or at the sentencing hearing, even when the judge specifically asked for clarification regarding the discrepancy between the advisement and the actual statutory requirement. Consequently, the court denied the defendant’s motion to amend his brief with a new declaration as improper and futile, finding it contradicted the evidentiary record. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.