USCA4 Appeal: 22-4123      Doc: 37         Filed: 09/20/2024    Pg: 1 of 3




                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                              No. 22-4123


        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        ANTONIO SIMMONS, a/k/a Murdock, a/k/a Doc,

                            Defendant - Appellant.



        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. (2:16-cr-00130-MSD-LRL-1)


        Submitted: August 26, 2024                                  Decided: September 20, 2024


        Before AGEE, WYNN, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.


        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


        ON BRIEF: Andrew M. Stewart, SLOAN STEWART PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for
        Appellant. Jessica D. Aber, United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, John F. Butler,
        Assistant United States Attorney, Joseph DePadilla, Assistant United States Attorney,
        Norfolk, Virginia, Vetan Kapoor, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE
        UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.


        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4123        Doc: 37        Filed: 09/20/2024      Pg: 2 of 3




        PER CURIAM:

               Antonio Simmons was convicted of various crimes arising from his involvement in

        the Nine Trey Gangsters, a set of the United Blood Nation. On appeal, we vacated certain

        convictions and remanded for resentencing. United States v. Simmons, 

        (4th Cir. 2021). On remand, Simmons was sentenced to three consecutive life terms plus

        35 years’ imprisonment. He again appealed.

               On appeal, the parties agree that the discretionary condition of supervised release

        imposed requiring substance abuse treatment suffered from Rogers error in that there was

        a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and written judgment. The parties further

        agree that resentencing is required. See United States v. Rogers, 

 (4th

        Cir. 2020) (requiring sentencing court to orally pronounce all nondiscretionary supervised

        release conditions); see also United States v. Lassiter, 

 (4th Cir. 2024), petition

        for cert. filed (U.S. Mar. 20, 2024) (finding error in similar circumstances).

               Accordingly, we vacate Simmons’ sentence and remand for a full resentencing. In

        light of our remand, we decline to address Simmons’ challenge to another condition of his

        supervised release. In addition, although this case began as an Anders * case, the parties

        were directed to file merits briefs, and they have done so. Accordingly, we decline to

        consider the issues raised in Simmons’ pro se supplemental briefs. See, e.g., United States

        v. Hare, 

, 106 n.11 (4th Cir. 2016) (declining to consider pro se brief filed by

        appellant represented on direct appeal by counsel); United States v. Penniegraft, 641 F.3d


               *
                   Anders v. California, 

 (1967).

                                                      2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4123         Doc: 37    Filed: 09/20/2024   Pg: 3 of 3




        566, 569 n.1 (4th Cir. 2011) (declining to consider pro se brief filed in counseled,

        non-Anders appeal). Finally, we deny Simmons’ motion for appointment of a new

        attorney. 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