Court Opinion

ID: 9957240
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-03 21:01:15.684935+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:12.088958
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6975      Doc: 5         Filed: 04/02/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6975

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        JAMES ERNEST LESPIER,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Bryson City. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (2:10-cr-00009-MR-WCM-1)

        Submitted: March 28, 2024                                           Decided: April 2, 2024

        Before KING and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        James Ernest Lespier, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6975         Doc: 5     Filed: 04/02/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              James Ernest Lespier appeals the district court’s order denying his renewed 18

        U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. We review a district court’s

        order denying a compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion. United States v.

        Centeno-Morales, 90 F.4th 274, 280 (4th Cir. 2024). We have reviewed the record and

        conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the

        district court’s order. United States v. Lespier, No. 2:10-cr-00009-MR-WCM-1 (W.D.N.C.

        Sept. 18, 2023). 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