Case Explained: USA V. ROGERS

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-04 Docket: 1:25-cr-00058-JAO-1 The Ninth Circuit affirmed Marlon Anthony Rogers’s 56-month above-Guidelines sentence for cyberstalking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2)(B). The court applied a plain error standard to reject Rogers’s claim that the district court failed to adequately explain the variance, finding the judge’s reliance on the egregiousness of the conduct permitted meaningful appellate review and did not create a reasonable probability of a different outcome. The court further held that the sentence was substantively reasonable under Gall v. United States, ruling that the district court did not engage in impermissible double-counting by considering factors already reflected in the Guidelines range, but rather properly varied upward because the Guidelines did not sufficiently account for the nature and circumstances of the offense. The judgment of the District Court for the District of Hawaii is affirmed. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.