Published: 2026-08-17 · Prepared by the Federal Appeals Research Desk editorial research desk

The Federal Criminal Appeal, Step by Step

The process of filing an appeal in federal criminal appellate practice and procedure is governed by several key statutes and rules that guide the actions of both defense counsel and the government. This article explores the procedural path followed by defendants like Danny Roney and Zerion Franklin as they navigate through the appeals system, focusing on how these regulations shape their cases.

Initial Filing of Appeals

In federal criminal appellate practice, a defendant seeking to appeal a district court’s decision must follow strict procedural guidelines. The process begins with filing a notice of appeal within the time limits prescribed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. For instance, Danny Roney's case highlights the importance of these timelines. In his scenario, after being conditionally discharged from a federal mental-health facility following a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity for mailing threats to his counsel, any subsequent revocation of his conditional discharge must adhere to strict procedural rules.

When filing an appeal, the defendant’s defense counsel must ensure that all necessary documents are submitted correctly and within the designated period. This includes preparing briefs and arguments that challenge specific aspects of the lower court's decision or sentence. The case of Zerion Franklin exemplifies this process, where he appealed his sentence based on the district court's imposition of a firearm enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B1.1(b)(16)(B).

Review by Appellate Courts

The appellate review in federal criminal cases is conducted by circuit courts, which assess whether the lower court has erred in applying legal standards or procedural rules. In Danny Roney's case, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed his challenge to the revocation of his conditional discharge under 18 U.S.C. § 4243. The court’s role here was to determine if the district court had correctly interpreted and applied statutory limitations regarding conditions ancillary to mental health treatment.

Similarly, in Zerion Franklin's case, the Fourth Circuit reviewed whether the district court erred in imposing a firearm enhancement without sufficient factual findings linking the weapon to his offenses. The appellate courts must evaluate such challenges under specific standards of review—often de novo for legal issues and abuse of discretion or clear error for factual determinations.

Oral Arguments

The process often involves oral arguments where both defense counsel and the United States Attorney present their cases to a panel of judges. In Danny Roney’s case, oral arguments were held on September 12, 2025, before Judges Agee, Richardson, and Berner. During these sessions, counsel argue key points and address questions from the bench that clarify or challenge aspects of the appeal.

For Zerion Franklin's case, a similar process was followed with oral arguments held on January 30, 2026, before Judges Agee, Benjamin, and Berner. These sessions are crucial for elucidating complex legal issues and influencing the judges' decisions.

Judicial Opinions

Following the review process and oral arguments, appellate courts issue their opinions which can affirm, reverse, or vacate lower court decisions. In Danny Roney's case, the Fourth Circuit's published opinion affirmed the district court's decision while providing a detailed analysis of § 4243 limitations.

“AFFIRMED” — United States v. Roney, No. 24-4556 (4th Cir.)

In contrast, for Zerion Franklin, the court's published opinion vacated and remanded because the district court failed to make factual findings linking Franklin's possession of a firearm with either of his offenses. These opinions not only resolve the immediate case but also set precedents that can influence future cases in similar procedural paths.

“Vacated and remanded with instructions by published opinion.” — United States v. Zerion Franklin, No. 25-4037 (4th Cir.)

Post-Decision Proceedings

The process concludes with post-decision proceedings where losing parties may seek further review through motions for rehearing, petitions for certiorari to the Supreme Court, or other mechanisms as allowed by law. In Danny Roney's case, if he did not agree with the affirmance, he could have pursued additional avenues of appeal.

Similarly, Zerion Franklin’s case was remanded back to the district court for resentencing based on the appellate decision. This phase is critical in ensuring that all aspects of justice are thoroughly examined and that procedural fairness is maintained throughout the system.

This article provides a neutral walkthrough of how federal criminal appeals operate through recent docket examples from the Fourth Circuit, focusing on statutes like 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and rules such as Fed. R. App. P. 4 without offering legal advice or recommendations to any reader. It serves as general research material for understanding appellate processes in federal criminal cases.

Legal Standards of Review

The appellate courts review cases based on specific legal standards that guide their assessment of various aspects of the lower court’s decisions. In Danny Roney's case, the Fourth Circuit reviewed the interpretation and application of 18 U.S.C. § 4243 regarding the conditions for revoking a conditional discharge. The standard applied here was one of de novo review to determine whether the district court correctly interpreted statutory limitations concerning ancillary conditions.

Similarly, in Zerion Franklin’s case, the Fourth Circuit reviewed the factual findings linking Franklin's firearm possession with his offenses under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B1.1(b)(16)(B). Here, the standard of review was abuse of discretion, allowing the appellate court to evaluate whether the district court made a clear error in its decision-making process regarding the imposition of the firearm enhancement.

Role of Defense Counsel and the Government

The involvement of defense counsel is crucial throughout the appeals process. In Danny Roney’s case, Kimberly Harvey Albro from the Office of the Federal Public Defender represented him during oral arguments before the Fourth Circuit on September 12, 2025. Her role was to present legal and factual challenges to the district court's decision regarding his conditional discharge.

Conversely, the United States Attorney’s office played a significant role in defending the district court’s decisions. In both Danny Roney's and Zerion Franklin’s cases, the government's counsel argued that the district courts' rulings were correct under applicable statutes and guidelines. For instance, Winston David Holliday Jr., from the Office of the United States Attorney, represented the Government in support of the revocation decision against Roney.

Impact on Future Cases

The outcomes of appellate cases often set precedents that influence future litigation within the same jurisdiction. The Fourth Circuit's opinion in Danny Roney’s case provides a detailed interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 4243, which may guide how similar cases are handled by district courts and appealed to the Fourth Circuit.

Similarly, the court's decision in Zerion Franklin's case clarifies the requirement for factual findings linking firearms with offenses when imposing enhancements under the Sentencing Guidelines. This ruling will likely impact future sentencing hearings and appeals involving firearm possession allegations.

Conclusion

This article has provided a neutral walkthrough of federal criminal appellate practice, focusing on recent cases from the Fourth Circuit to illustrate key procedural steps and legal standards involved in filing an appeal. The examples of Danny Roney and Zerion Franklin demonstrate how defendants navigate these processes with guidance from defense counsel and scrutiny by the government's counsel.

The statutes and rules discussed, such as 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and Fed. R. App. P. 4, shape the framework within which appeals are conducted, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal standards. This article serves as general research material for understanding appellate processes in federal criminal cases without offering any form of legal advice.

Primary sources

• Fed. R. App. P. 4 — Appeal as of Right—When Taken (law.cornell.edu) — “In a criminal case, a defendant’s notice of appeal must be filed in the district court within 14 days after the later of: (i) the entry of either the judgment or the order being appealed; or (ii) the filing of the government’s notice of appeal.” — Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)
• 28 U.S.C. § 1291 — Final decisions of district courts (law.cornell.edu) — “The courts of appeals (other than the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States, the United States District Court for the District of the Canal Zone, the District Court of Guam, and the District Court of the Virgin Islands, except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court.” — 28 U.S.C. § 1291
• United States v. Danny Roney, No. 24-4556 (4th Cir.) (CourtListener) — “AFFIRMED”
• United States v. Zerion Franklin, No. 25-4037 (4th Cir.) (CourtListener) — “Vacated and remanded with instructions by published opinion.”