United States v. Joshua Sampsell, 541 F. App'x 258

Sampsell appeals a two-year probation sentence after a conditional guilty plea to interstate travel and failure to register under SORNA (18 U.S.C. § 2250(a)).
Sampsell challenges SORNA’s retroactivity as being impermissibly delegated by Congress and claims Ex Post Facto violation.
The panel reviews de novo legal questions on indictment dismissal and preserved constitutional claims.
The court analyzes the non-delegation doctrine, applying the intelligible principle standard from Hampton and Mistretta.
The court cites multiple circuits’ decisions rejecting non-delegation challenges and holds the Attorney General may determine retroactivity.
The Ex Post Facto challenge is foreclosed by a prior Fourth Circuit decision, United States v. Gould.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Non-delegation of retroactivity to AG	Sampsell argues Congress impermissibly delegated legislative retroactivity authority.	Government asserts a valid intelligible principle guides delegation to AG for retroactivity.	Non-delegation challenge rejected; delegation upheld.
Ex Post Facto applicability of SORNA retroactivity	SORNA retroactivity violates Ex Post Facto Clause.	SORNA retroactivity consistent with established precedent; no violation.	Ex Post Facto challenge rejected; foreclosed by Gould.

Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361 () (intelligible principle supports broad delegation)
Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 394 () (establishes intelligible principle standard)
S.C. Med. Ass’n v. Thompson, 327 F.3d 346 (4th Cir. 2003) (less burdensome delegation can be sufficient)
United States v. Gould, 568 F.3d 459 (4th Cir. 2009) (Ex Post Facto challenge foreclosed)
United States v. Rivers, 595 F.3d 558 (4th Cir. 2010) (panel cannot overrule prior panel precedent)
United States v. Ambert, 561 F.3d 1202 (11th Cir. 2009) (non-delegation principle context)
United States v. Goodwin, 717 F.3d 511 (7th Cir. 2013) (circuit alignment on delegation and retroactivity)