United States of America v. Curtis Lakoy Edmonds, a/k/a Rude Boy

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7429
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CURTIS LAKOY EDMONDS, a/k/a Rude Boy,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:08-cr-00368-BO-1)
Submitted: May 17, 2021 Decided: May 27, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
G. Alan DuBois, Federal Public Defender, Jaclyn L. Tarlton, Assistant Federal Public
Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellant. Robert J. Higdon, Jr., United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker,
Assistant United States Attorney, Banumathi Rangarajan, Assistant United States
Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Curtis Lakoy Edmonds 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 on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
the motion for compassionate release. See United States v. High, __ F.3d __, __, No. 20-
7350, 2021 WL 1823289, at *6 (4th Cir. Apr. 21, 2021) (rejecting argument that district
court must invariably address defendant’s arguments on record in denying motion for
compassionate release). Accordingly, we affirm. United States v. Edmonds, No. 5:08-cr-
00368-BO-1 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 14, 2020). We deny as moot Edmonds’ motion to expedite
and 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 of 2 --