United States v. Franklin Myers, Jr., 19-4531

Myers pled guilty to (1) conspiracy to distribute ≥5 kg cocaine (21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846) and (2) possession with intent to distribute ≥500 g cocaine.
The district court sentenced Myers to 168 months, within the Guidelines range, and imposed a 10-year ban on federal benefits.
Myers’ counsel filed an Anders brief; the panel ordered supplemental briefing on the adequacy of the sentencing explanation and the statutory authority for the benefits ban under 21 U.S.C. § 862(a).
The district court denied Myers’ request for a downward variance and imposed the within-Guidelines sentence and the benefits ban.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the convictions, concluded the court’s sentencing explanation (when considered with the variance denial) was adequate, but found the 10-year federal-benefits ban plainly erroneous and vacated that portion of the judgment.
The court vacated Myers’ sentence in part and remanded for resentencing (and directed counsel to notify Myers of Supreme Court petition rights).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court adequately explained the chosen sentence	Myers argued the court failed to provide an individualized, reasoned § 3553(a) explanation and did not address non-frivolous mitigation arguments	Gov't argued the court sufficiently considered the parties’ arguments and the Guidelines sentence was supported	Court held explanation adequate when the court’s denial of the variance and its reasons are considered together; no abuse of discretion on this ground
Whether a 10-year ban on federal benefits was authorized under 21 U.S.C. § 862(a)	Myers argued § 862(a)(1)(B) applies to distribution offenses and not to a conspiracy conviction here (and any § 862(b) ban would exceed permissible duration)	Gov't did not contest the Court’s conclusion vacating the benefits ban	Court held the imposition of a 10-year federal-benefits ban was plain error; vacated that portion of the judgment and remanded for resentencing

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (standards for appointed counsel’s Anders brief and appellate review)
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review)
United States v. Ross, 912 F.3d 740 (4th Cir. 2019) (district court must address non-frivolous arguments for different sentence)
United States v. Blue, 877 F.3d 513 (4th Cir. 2017) (district court should provide individualized assessment justifying sentence)
United States v. Allen, 716 F.3d 98 (4th Cir. 2013) (conspiracy elements differ from distribution; § 862 applies to distribution offenses)