United States of America v. Monica Mccants, a/k/a Money

21-6271Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 20, 2021

Full text

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-6271
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MONICA MCCANTS, a/k/a Money,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:11-cr-00426-JKB-4)
Submitted: September 14, 2021 Decided: September 20, 2021
Before THACKER and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony D. Martin, ANTHONY D. MARTIN, PC, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant.
Jonathan F. Lenzner, Acting United States Attorney, Daniel A. Loveland, Jr., Assistant
United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Monica McCants appeals the district court’s order denying her 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release. After reviewing the record, we
conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) factors weighed against granting compassionate release in this case. See United
States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review); see also
United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 189 (4th Cir. 2021) (affirming district court order
denying compassionate release where “[t]he court’s rationale . . . was both rational and
legitimate under [18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)]” and “the court sufficiently explained its denial to
allow for meaningful appellate review” (internal quotation marks omitted)). We therefore
affirm the district court’s order. United States v. McCants, No. 1:11-cr-00426-JKB-4 (D.
Md. Feb. 12, 2021). We deny as moot McCants’ motion to submit on briefs. 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

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.