PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-4185

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

DANIEL N. KEMP, SR.,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:19-cr-000149-BO-2)

Argued: September 19, 2023 Decided: December 13, 2023

Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by published opinion. Judge Harris wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge Quattlebaum and Senior Judge Keenan joined. Judge Quattlebaum wrote a concurring opinion. USCA4 Appeal: 21-4185 Doc: 66 Filed: 12/13/2023 Pg: 2 of 28

ARGUED: Daniel Baker McIntyre, III, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas Ernest Booth, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Kenneth A. Polite, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Lisa H. Miller, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Appellate Section, Criminal Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Michael F. Easley, Jr., United States Attorney, David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 21-4185 Doc: 66 Filed: 12/13/2023 Pg: 3 of 28

PAMELA HARRIS, Circuit Judge:

Defendant Daniel N. Kemp, Sr., was charged with nine counts of sexually abusing

his adopted children. Pursuant to an agreement with the government, he pleaded guilty to

one count of aggravated sexual abuse, and the remaining charges were dismissed. The

district court sentenced Kemp to life imprisonment – a term within the Sentencing

Guidelines range adopted by the court – and to a lifetime term of supervised release.

Kemp appealed, and his appointed counsel filed an Anders brief raising two issues

but concluding that the appeal was without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). After this court ordered supplemental briefing to address additional issues

regarding Kemp’s conviction and sentence, the government asked that we dismiss Kemp’s

appeal as untimely. We conclude, however, that the government has forfeited the

timeliness issue and we therefore reach the merits of Kemp’s appeal. For the reasons given

below, we affirm Kemp’s conviction. But because Kemp’s written judgment includes

discretionary conditions of supervised release that were not orally pronounced at

sentencing, we follow our usual practice, see United States v. Rogers, 961 F.3d 291 (4th

Cir. 2020), vacating Kemp’s sentence and remanding for resentencing.

I.

A.

As the district court emphasized at sentencing, this case arises from very disturbing

facts. While Daniel Kemp was serving in the United States Army in New York, he and his

wife adopted six children. Years later, with Kemp now stationed in North Carolina, it was

3 USCA4 Appeal: 21-4185 Doc: 66 Filed: 12/13/2023 Pg: 4 of 28

revealed that Kemp had been forcing his adopted children to engage in sexual acts at their

home. The investigation began when one of Kemp’s children told her teach