Court Opinion

ID: 9404375
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-22 21:03:16.600337+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:13.432956
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6310      Doc: 5         Filed: 06/21/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6310

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        MARTINEZ ORLANDIS BLACK,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:06-cr-00364-RJC-1)

        Submitted: June 15, 2023                                            Decided: June 21, 2023

        Before DIAZ, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Martinez Orlandis Black, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6310      Doc: 5         Filed: 06/21/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Martinez Orlandis Black appeals the district court’s order denying his motions for

        sentencing credit. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal

        brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Black’s informal brief does not challenge the basis

        for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order.

        See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an

        important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved

        in that brief.”). Accordingly, 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

                                                     2