Case Explained: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. QUILLAN INMAN

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-05 The fourth-circuit affirmed Quillan Inman’s conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm but vacated his 100-month sentence and remanded the case for resentencing. The court held that Inman waived his challenge to the lawfulness of the initial traffic stop because he expressly conceded before the district court that the stop was lawful based on a moving traffic violation; under Fourth Circuit precedent, such an intentional relinquishment of a known right precludes appellate review, even for plain error. Regarding the sentence, the court applied de novo review to legal conclusions and clear error review to factual findings, determining that the district court committed significant procedural error by applying a four-point sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) without making specific factual findings identifying the predicate felony offense that the firearm facilitated or had the potential to facilitate. The district court’s failure to explain its rationale or adopt the presentencing report’s facts left the appellate court unable to discern the basis for the enhancement, and because the imposed sentence of 100 months exceeded the applicable Guidelines range of 63 to 78 months that would have applied without the enhancement, the error was not harmless. Consequently, the case is remanded to the district court to impose a new sentence consistent with the correct Guidelines range. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.