Opinion
21-7148
06-03-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHARLES ELOYS JOHNSON, a/k/a Adam White, Defendant-Appellant.
Kimberly H. Albro, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. M. Rhett Dehart, Acting United States Attorney, Nathan S. Williams, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: April 28, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:15-cr-00386-RMG-1)
ON BRIEF:
Kimberly H. Albro, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
M. Rhett Dehart, Acting United States Attorney, Nathan S. Williams, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Charles Eloys Johnson appeals the district court's order denying his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have reviewed the record on appeal and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Johnson's motion. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.) (providing standard), cert. denied, 142 S.Ct. 383 (2021). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Johnson, No. 2:15-cr-00386-RMG-1 (D.S.C. July 19, 2021). 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.