Court Opinion

ID: 9403954
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-21 21:00:44.491582+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:10.111703
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6350      Doc: 11         Filed: 06/20/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6350

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        STEVEN MCCALL,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:12-cr-00351-BO-10)

        Submitted: June 15, 2023                                          Decided: June 20, 2023

        Before DIAZ, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Steven McCall, Appellant Pro Se. John Parks Newby, Assistant United States Attorney,
        OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6350         Doc: 11     Filed: 06/20/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Steven McCall appeals the district court’s order denying his third 18 U.S.C.

        § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release based on his medical conditions

        considered in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.         We review the denial of a

        compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion. United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d

        326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021).

              Upon review of the record, we discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s

        determination that the circumstances in this case, evaluated in light of the pertinent 18

        U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, did not warrant the grant of compassionate release.

        See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 187 (4th Cir. 2021). Accordingly, we affirm the

        district court’s order. United States v. McCall, No. 5:12-cr-00351-BO-10 (E.D.N.C. Mar.

        18, 2022). 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