United States of America v. Quentin Dwayne Mcnebb, a/k/a QB

21-7145Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit02.06.2022

Gesamter Gesetzestext

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7145
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
QUENTIN DWAYNE MCNEBB, a/k/a QB,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Danville. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (4:12-cr-00001-JPJ-4)
Submitted: April 28, 2022 Decided: June 2, 2022
Before DIAZ and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Quentin Dwayne McNebb, Appellant Pro Se. Krista Consiglio Frith, Assistant United
States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Quentin Dwayne McNebb 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, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239, and his motions for
reconsideration. Our review of the record convinces us that the district court did not abuse
its discretion in concluding that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors did not weigh in favor of
compassionate release. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 186-87 (4th Cir. 2021)
(affirming denial of compassionate release on balancing of § 3553(a) factors).
Accordingly, we affirm the denial of relief on that basis.* United States v. McNebb, No.
4:12-cr-00001-JPJ-4 (W.D. Va. June 24, 2021 & July 16, 2021). We deny McNebb’s
motion for appointment of counsel 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
* To the extent that McNebb intended to appeal the July 19, 2021, order denying his
Motion for Leave to Proceed, he forfeited appellate review by failing to challenge that
order in his informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.