PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-4027

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CHAD MARQUES JENNINGS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:22-cr-00262-WO-1)

Argued: October 31, 2024 Decided: March 4, 2025

Before WILKINSON, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Thacker wrote the opinion in which Judge Wilkinson and Judge King joined.

ARGUED: Eric David Placke, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Julie Carol Niemeier, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra J. Hairston, United States Attorney, Jacob D. Pryor, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. USCA4 Appeal: 24-4027 Doc: 35 Filed: 03/04/2025 Pg: 2 of 10

THACKER, Circuit Judge:

This case concerns the right of allocution and the ability of the district court to

impose necessary limitations on that right. Chad Marques Jennings (“Appellant”) claims

the district court violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(4)(A)(ii) by preventing

him from reading one of his three prepared statements and interjecting with questions

during his allocution at his sentencing hearing.

Because the district court is permitted to engage with the defendant during

allocution and, here, exercised its discretion to exclude irrelevant and repetitive

information, we affirm.

I.

On September 12, 2021, police officers responded to a noise complaint at a house

party in Sanford, North Carolina. While there, they heard gunshots and saw Appellant run

to a blue van and speed away. The officers chased and caught up with Appellant and

detained him for fleeing the officers. While detained, Appellant told officers he had a gun

in his waistband. Officers later recovered bullet casings at the scene of the shooting, and

those casings were a match for Appellant’s gun. At the time Appellant knew that he had a

prior felony conviction and was not allowed to possess a firearm.

Based on this incident, Appellant was charged and later pled guilty to one count of

being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). During the

sentencing hearing, after hearing from Appellant’s attorney, the court invited Appellant to

address the court in allocution: “Mr. Jennings . . . you do have the right to address the Court

2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-4027 Doc: 35 Filed: 03/04/2025 Pg: 3 of 10

before any sentence is imposed, and if you wish to address the Court, now is the appropriate

time.” J.A. 74.1 Appellant chose to address the court and spoke at length about how

alcoholism had impacted his life and contributed to his criminality. In addition, Appellant

read a poem he had written to the court. Then, he also read a prepared speech wherein he

thanked his defense attorney and again explained how alcohol contributed to his criminal

history.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document