US v. Kenneth Jacob

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-cr-00177-F-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999749861].. [15-4401]

Appeal: 15-4401

Doc: 29

Filed: 02/05/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4401

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KENNETH CHRISTOPHER JACOBS, a/k/a TC,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:14-cr-00177-F-1)

Submitted:

January 26, 2016

Decided:

February 5, 2016

Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant.
Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer
P. May-Parker, Yvonne V. Watford-McKinney, Assistant United
States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-4401

Doc: 29

Filed: 02/05/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Christopher Jacobs pled guilty to possession with
the intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine, in violation of
21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2012).
the

18

U.S.C.

Guidelines

§ 3553(a)

term

of

The district court, discussing

(2012)

imprisonment

factors,
of

168

imposed

months

a

and

variant term of supervised release of 10 years.

within-

an

upward

On appeal,

Jacobs contends that his 10-year term of supervised release is
substantively unreasonable.
Because

Jacobs

did

not

object

to

the

imposed

term

of

supervised release in the district court, we review only for
plain error.

Webb, 738 F.3d at 640-41.

Under the plain error

standard, Jacobs must show (1) an error; (2) that is plain;
(3) that

affects

substantial

rights;

and

(4)

that

seriously

affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial
proceedings.

Id.

“An error is plain when it is obvious or

clear under current law.”

United States v. Chong Lam, 677 F.3d

190, 201 (4th Cir. 2012).
A district court, “in determining . . . the length of the
term and the conditions of supervised release, shall consider
the

factors

set

forth

in

section

3553(a)(1),

(a)(2)(B),

(a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7).”
U.S.C. § 3583(c) (2012).

18

Having reviewed the record, we do not

2

Appeal: 15-4401

Doc: 29

Filed: 02/05/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

find it obvious or clear that the district court’s imposition of
a

10-year

term

unreasonable
repeated

of

given

Jacobs’

violations

of

release.

See

“adequate

deterrence

determining

18

supervised

proper

extensive

terms

U.S.C.
to

release

of

criminal
probation

§ 3553(a)(2)(B)
criminal

sentence);

cf.

was

record
and

(2012)

conduct”
U.S.

substantively
and

his

supervised
(identifying

as

Sentencing

factor

for

Guidelines

Manual § 4A1.3 cmt. background (2014) (identifying greater risk
of recidivism where defendant’s criminal record contains pattern
of offenses and repeated lenient sentences).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3