USCA4 Appeal: 21-7392 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/25/2022 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7392

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KEVIN ALEXANDER SCOTT, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:09-cr-00581-GLR-1)

Submitted: June 30, 2022 Decided: July 25, 2022

Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Alexander Scott, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7392 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/25/2022 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: In October 2020, the district court denied Kevin Alexander Scott’s motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). We vacated that judgment and remanded for further proceedings. United States v. Scott, 856 F. App’x 460, 461 (4th Cir. 2021) (No. 20-7687). On remand, the court explained that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors counsel against a sentence reduction and thus denied the motion. Scott appeals.

We review a district court’s denial of a compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion. United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the court sufficiently explained the reasons for the denial and did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.

See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 188-91 (4th Cir. 2021) (discussing amount of explanation required for denial of compassionate release motion). Accordingly, 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