Court Opinion

ID: 9949416
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-11 17:01:12.446663+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:26:12.878836
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6301      Doc: 28         Filed: 03/08/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6301

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        MARC PIERRE HALL, a/k/a Marc Valeriano, a/k/a Fella,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:95-cr-00005-FDW-1)

        Submitted: March 4, 2024                                          Decided: March 8, 2024

        Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Marc Pierre Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney,
        OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for
        Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6301      Doc: 28         Filed: 03/08/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Marc Pierre Hall appeals the district court’s order granting in part his motion for a

        sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132

        Stat. 5194, 5222, and his motions for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C.

        § 3582(c)(1)(A). Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Hall’s informal

        brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014), and

        finding no reversible error, we affirm the district court’s judgment, United States v. Hall,

        No. 3:95-cr-00005-FDW-1 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 28, 2022). We deny as moot Hall’s motion for

        reconsideration of our order placing his appeal in abeyance. 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