Opinion
21-6464
07-23-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. REGINALD MCKINNON, a/k/a Reg, a/k/a Big Reggie, Defendant-Appellant.
Reginald McKinnon, Appellant Pro Se. Lauren L. Hummel, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. (4:14-cr-00259-RBH-8)
Submitted: July 20, 2021
Reginald McKinnon, Appellant Pro Se.
Lauren L. Hummel, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Reginald McKinnon 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, 132 Stat. 5194. We review the district court's order for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021). "A district court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily or irrationally, fails to consider judicially recognized factors constraining its exercise of discretion, relies on erroneous factual or legal premises, or commits an error of law." United States v. Dillard, 891 F.3d 151, 158 (4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted). Our review of the record shows that the district court properly considered the circumstances presented by the pandemic, McKinnon's health conditions, and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, before denying McKinnon's motion. Therefore, 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