Court Opinion

ID: 9831317
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:00:35.411842+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:38.164339
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7386      Doc: 15         Filed: 08/31/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-7386

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        CLYDE WAYNE ANDERSON, a/k/a Buck,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:18-cr-00474-FL-1)

        Submitted: August 29, 2023                                        Decided: August 31, 2023

        Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Clyde Wayne Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Katharine Paige O’Hale, 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        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 22-7386         Doc: 15      Filed: 08/31/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Clyde Wayne Anderson appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C.

        § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. Upon review, we discern no abuse of

        discretion in the district court’s denial of Anderson’s motion. See United States v. High,

        997 F.3d 181, 185 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the

        district court’s order. * United States v. Anderson, No. 5:18-cr-00474-FL-1 (E.D.N.C.

        Nov. 3, 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

               *
                We decline to address the issues Anderson raises for the first time on appeal
        regarding the validity of his career offender status and the health of his son’s caretaker.
        United States v. Herrera-Pagoada, 14 F.4th 311, 318 (4th Cir. 2021).

                                                    2