United States v. Preston Mills, Jr.

── United States v. Preston Mills, Jr. ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: April 20, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 25-4075 Doc: 50 Filed: 04/20/2026 Pg: 1 of 17 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-4075 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. PRESTON MILLS, JR., Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:08-cr-00525-REP-1) Argued: March 20, 2026 Decided: April 20, 2026 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by published opinion. Judge Agee wrote the opinion, in which Judge Gregory and Judge Benjamin joined. ARGUED: Salvatore M. Mancina, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Olivia L. Norman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Geremy C. Kamens, Federal Public Defender, Carolyn V. Grady, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Erik S. Siebert, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. USCA4 Appeal: 25-4075 Doc: 50 Filed: 04/20/2026 Pg: 2 of 17 AGEE, Circuit Judge: Preston Mills, Jr., appeals the district court’s revocation of his supervised release and his 24-month revocation sentence. Mills argues that the district court’s finding that he violated the mandatory condition not to commit a new crime was clearly erroneous and that his revocation sentence is plainly unreasonable because the district court ignored a potentially non-frivolous mitigation argument. On review, we find no error in the district court’s decision to revoke Mills’ supervised release, but we agree with Mills that his revocation sentence is plainly unreasonable. Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Mills’ supervised release but vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing. I. Mills pleaded guilty in 2008 to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 847, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 924(c). The district court ultimately sentenced Mills to 88 months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. In April 2015, Mills was released from federal custody and began his term of supervision. Mills’ probation officer filed a petition to revoke his supervised release in November 2018, alleging that Mills had violated the terms of his supervision. Among other things, the probation officer alleged that Mills violated the mandatory condition not to commit a new crime after he was charged in state court with strangulation and assault and battery of his then-girlfriend, Lakiesha Moore. While the petition was pending, the probation officer filed an addendum alleging that Mills again violated that same mandatory 2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-4075 Doc: 50 Filed: 04/20/2026 Pg: 3 of 17 condition based on a charge in Hanover County, Virginia, for assault and battery of his estranged wife, Cleo Mills. At a June 2019 revocation hearing, the district court revoked Mills’ term of supervised release and sentenced him to 18 months in prison, followed by