Opinion
22-6165
09-28-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERTO BROWN, a/k/a AB, Defendant-Appellant.
Roberto Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: September 19, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:15-cr-00800-RMG-1)
Roberto Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and DIAZ and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Roberto Brown appeals the district court's order denying his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). In his informal brief, Brown argues that the district court abused its discretion by finding that he had not established extraordinary and compelling reasons for his release. However, Brown fails to dispute the district court's conclusion that, even if he established extraordinary and compelling reasons for release, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weighed against granting him relief.
On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Brown's informal brief does not challenge the district court's dispositive finding regarding his compassionate release motion, he has forfeited appellate review of the district court's order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) ("The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief."). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. 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