United States v. Vincent Manning
United States v. Vincent Manning
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7787
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
VINCENT MARLOUS MANNING, a/k/a V-Tek,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (1:10-cr-00466-MBS-8)
Submitted: March 29, 2021 Decided: April 5, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent Marlous Manning, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Vincent Marlous Manning appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for
compassionate release under
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. After reviewing the
record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Manning’s
motion. See United States v. Chambliss,
948 F.3d 691, 693(5th Cir. 2020) (stating
standard). Accordingly, we deny Manning’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Manning, No. 1:10-cr-00466-MBS-8
(D.S.C. Oct. 7, 2020). 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
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished