USA v. Karriece Quontrel Davis

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-17492
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:08-cr-00005-MW-GRJ-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KARRIECE QUONTREL DAVIS,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(February 5, 2018)
Before TJOFLAT, WILSON, and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 16-17492 Date Filed: 02/05/2018 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Karriece Davis, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district
court’s denial of his motion for credit for time served and denial of his motion for
reconsideration. Davis’s notice of appeal in this case states that he wishes to
appeal the order denying his motion for reconsideration, but his appellate brief in
this case discusses the district court’s denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
60(b) motion for relief from judgment from which Davis has filed a separate notice
of appeal.
An appellant’s brief must contain a statement of all of the issues presented
for review. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(5). We liberally construe pro se pleadings.
Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam).
A pro se appellant nonetheless still abandons an issue when he fails to offer
argument on the issue in his brief. Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th
Cir. 2008) (per curiam).
Davis has not raised any argument in his brief challenging the district court’s
denials of his motion for credit for time served and his motion for reconsideration.
He thus has abandoned any challenge to those denials. See id. Accordingly, we
must affirm because Davis has not shown that the district court erred by denying
his motion for credit for time served or his motion for reconsideration.
AFFIRMED.
Case: 16-17492 Date Filed: 02/05/2018 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --