United States v. Leila Hector
United States v. Leila Hector
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6260 Doc: 17 Filed: 10/01/2024 Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-6260
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LEILA VARETTA HECTOR, a/k/a Leila Varretta Hector, a/k/a Leila Varetta Hector-Dykes, a/k/a Rita Hector,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 23-7133
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LEILA VARETTA HECTOR, a/k/a Leila Varretta Hector, a/k/a Leila Varetta Hector-Dykes, a/k/a Rita Hector,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (2:18-cr-00003-JPJ-PMS-2)
Submitted: September 23, 2024 Decided: October 1, 2024 USCA4 Appeal: 23-6260 Doc: 17 Filed: 10/01/2024 Pg: 2 of 3
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leila Varetta Hector, Appellant Pro Se. S. Cagle Juhan, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia; Jonathan Patrick Jones, Assistant United States Attorney, Jason Mitchell Scheff, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-6260 Doc: 17 Filed: 10/01/2024 Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Leila Varetta Hector appeals the district court’s
orders denying her motions for compassionate release under
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)
and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district
court did not abuse its discretion by finding that the
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weighed
against Hector’s release. See United States v. Malone,
57 F.4th 167, 172(4th Cir. 2023)
(stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. United
States v. Hector, No. 2:18-cr-00003-JPJ-PMS-2 (W.D. Va. Dec. 28, 2022; Feb. 27, 2023;
Oct. 5, 2023). 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
3
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished