United States v. Marcus Taylor
United States v. Marcus Taylor
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7670
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARCUS ROOSEVELT TAYLOR,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cr-00106-CCB-6)
Submitted: April 23, 2021 Decided: May 5, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marcus Roosevelt Taylor, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Marcus Roosevelt Taylor appeals the district court’s orders 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, 132Stat. 5194, and denying reconsideration. We review
the district court’s orders 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, Taylor’s age and health conditions, and the
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, before denying Taylor’s motions. Therefore, we affirm the
district court’s orders. 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- Unpublished