Court Opinion

ID: 9409632
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-18 21:00:34.13853+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:52.002834
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6652      Doc: 9         Filed: 07/17/2023      Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6652

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        JEFFREY ROY CROSBY,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
        Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (4:96-cr-00361-CMC-1)

        Submitted: June 29, 2023                                              Decided: July 17, 2023

        Before GREGORY, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jeffrey Roy Crosby, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Michelle Stoughton, Assistant United
        States Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South
        Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6652      Doc: 9         Filed: 07/17/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jeffrey Roy Crosby appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for

        compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step

        Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. Having reviewed the

        record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that the

        pertinent 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weighed against compassionate release. See United

        States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 185-87 (4th Cir. 2021); see also United States v. Ferguson,

        55 F.4th 262, 272 (4th Cir. 2022) (“[A] compassionate release motion cannot be used to

        challenge the validity of a defendant’s conviction or sentence.”), petition for cert. filed,

        No. 22-1216 (U.S. June 16, 2023). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. 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