United States v. Jaron Starkey

── United States v. Jaron Starkey ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: May 22, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 25-4099 Doc: 45 Filed: 05/22/2026 Pg: 1 of 5 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-4099 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JARON JAMES STARKEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:24-cr-00058-HEH-1) Argued: March 17, 2026 Decided: May 22, 2026 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Niemeyer wrote the opinion, in which Judge Agee and Judge Richardson joined. ARGUED: Patrick L. Bryant, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. James Reed Sawyers, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, 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, Angela Mastandrea, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. USCA4 Appeal: 25-4099 Doc: 45 Filed: 05/22/2026 Pg: 2 of 5 NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge: After pleading guilty to a federal drug-trafficking crime, Jaron Starkey was sentenced to 300 months’ imprisonment. His sentence included a career-offender enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, which the district court applied based on Starkey’s two prior felony drug-distribution convictions in 2012 and 2019 under Delaware law. Starkey contends on appeal that the two Delaware convictions should not have qualified as predicate convictions because the offenses did not categorically qualify as “controlled substance offenses,” as defined by the Sentencing Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b) (2021). He argues that the Delaware drug-distribution statutes under which he was convicted — Del. Code Ann. tit. 16, § 4752(a) (2011), and § 4754(1) (2018) — included the conduct of attempted drug distribution and therefore did not qualify as controlled substance offenses under United States v. Campbell, 22 F.4th 438, 440 (4th Cir. 2022) (holding, prior to a 2023 Guidelines amendment, that “the Sentencing Guidelines’ definition of a ‘controlled substance offense’ does not include” attempted drug-distribution offenses). We conclude, however, that Starkey’s argument is precluded first by the text of the applicable Delaware statutes. Starkey was convicted under § 4752 and § 4754, which punished “any person who manufactures, delivers, or possesses with intent to manufacture or deliver” illegal drugs. (Cleaned up). A separate Delaware statute criminalizes attempts to commit crimes. See Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 531. But Starkey was not convicted under the attempt statute. 2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-4099 Doc: 45 Filed: 05/22/2026 Pg: 3 of 5 Nonetheless, Starkey argues that the word “delivers,” as was used in § 4752 and § 4754, includes attempts because the statute defines “deliver” or “delivery” to “mean[] the actual, constructive or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship.” Del. Code Ann. tit.