Court Opinion

ID: 9412355
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-29 21:00:44.329582+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:31.223616
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6075      Doc: 13         Filed: 07/28/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6075

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        DENNIS WILLIAM BROWN,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:17-cr-00297-RJC-DCK-1)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                          Decided: July 28, 2023

        Before WYNN and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Dennis William Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6075      Doc: 13         Filed: 07/28/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Dennis William Brown appeals the district court’s order 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 Brown

        failed to show extraordinary and compelling reasons for release. 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. We also deny all of Brown’s pending motions. 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