Full Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 26-4053 Doc: 28 Filed: 10/16/2026 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 26-4053 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DONOVAN JAMES JACKSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Sherri A. Lydon, Chief District Judge. (3:25−cr−00506−SAL−1) Submitted: September 3, 2026 Decided: October 16, 2026 Before THACKER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Kimberly H. Albro, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Bryan P. Stirling, United States Attorney, Michael G. Shedd, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 26-4053 Doc: 28 Filed: 10/16/2026 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Donovan James Jackson (“Appellant”) appeals his 33 month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On appeal, Appellant challenges the district court’s application of a base offense level based on Appellant’s possession of a semiautomatic firearm capable of accepting a large capacity magazine (the “Enhancement”). U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(B) (2025). He argues the district court should have interpreted the meaning of “large capacity magazine” pursuant to Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024), rather than give deference to the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“Guidelines”) commentary pursuant to Kisor v. Wilkie, 588 U.S. 558 (2019). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. It is well established that Kisor provides the appropriate framework for determining whether to defer to the Guidelines’ commentary. See United States v. Boler, 115 F.4th 316, 322 (4th Cir. 2024) (“When deciding whether to defer to the Guidelines’ commentary, we apply the framework set forth in Kisor.”). And in United States v. Holman, we applied the Kisor framework and afforded deference to the Guidelines commentary definition of “large capacity magazine” as a magazine “that c[an] accept more than 15 rounds.” 171 F.4th at 316. This case concerns the same Guidelines commentary definition of the same term. Therefore, because Appellant possessed a firearm with a magazine capable of accepting 17 rounds of ammunition, the district court did not err in assessing the Enhancement against him. Moreover, given the district court’s thorough consideration of the Section 3553(a) factors, the district court did not abuse its discretion. Even if the district court erred in 2 USCA4 Appeal: 26-4053 Doc: 28 Filed: 10/16/2026 Pg: 3 of 3 applying the Enhancement, that error was harmless because the district court would have imposed the same sentence without the Enhancement and the sentence was substantively reasonable. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3