United States v. Kennedy

── United States v. Kennedy ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: May 15, 2026 Category: Direct Criminal Case: 25-60227 Document: 83-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED May 15, 2026 No. 25-60227 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Christopher Columbus Kennedy, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 1:18-CR-154-1 ______________________________ Before Jones, Clement, and Richman, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Christopher Columbus Kennedy appeals his revocation sentence, arguing that the district court did not orally pronounce certain discretionary conditions of supervised release that were set forth in the written judgment. Finding no error, we AFFIRM. Kennedy was convicted in February 2019 of possessing a firearm as a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-60227 Document: 83-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2026 No. 25-60227 sentenced him to 66 months of imprisonment to be followed by a three-year term of supervised release. As part of this term of supervised release, the court imposed thirteen standard conditions of supervision. Kennedy’s supervision commenced in August 2023. In April 2025, the United States Probation Office petitioned for a warrant for Kennedy’s arrest, alleging that he violated conditions of his supervised release. The district court held a revocation hearing, during which Kennedy admitted to four violations. The district court revoked Kennedy’s supervised release and sentenced him to six months of imprisonment to be followed by a 30-month term of supervised release. The court explained that while on supervised release, Kennedy must “comply with the standard conditions of supervision listed on the judgment order, which are reasonably related to the goals of sentencing and impose no greater restrictions than reasonably necessary to accomplish those goals in the Court’s view.” After imposing the sentence, the court asked if either party had anything further, and neither the government nor Kennedy’s counsel raised any further issues or objections. The court’s written judgment included the same thirteen standard conditions of supervision as the original judgment for Kennedy’s underlying conviction. Kennedy timely appealed. The parties disagree as to the appropriate standard of review. When, as here, “a defendant objects to a condition of supervised release for the first time on appeal, the standard of review depends on whether he had an opportunity to object before the district court.” United States v. Grogan, 977 F.3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2020). If a defendant had the opportunity to object “but failed to do so, we review for plain error. If he did not have the opportunity, we review for abuse of discretion.” Id. (citations omitted). The opportunity to object “exists when the court notifies the defendant at sentencing that conditions are being imposed.” Un