UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6295

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHANE DOUGLAS SICHTING, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (8:16-cr-00181-BHH-1)

Submitted: September 9, 2021 Decided: September 14, 2021

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shane Douglas Sichting, Appellant Pro Se. Justin William Holloway, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Shane Douglas Sichting appeals the district court’s orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motions for compassionate release and denying reconsideration. We review a district court’s order granting or denying a compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion. United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion. The court denied Sichting’s motions after discussing the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and sufficiently explained the reasons for the denial. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 188-91 (4th Cir. 2021) (discussing amount of explanation required for denial of straightforward compassionate release motion). We therefore 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