United States of America v. Robert Logan Gorman, a/k/a Robert Gorman

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-6305
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT LOGAN GORMAN, a/k/a Robert Gorman,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (2:19-cr-00131-1)
Submitted: June 2, 2021 Decided: June 15, 2021
Before MOTZ, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Logan Gorman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Robert Logan Gorman appeals the district court’s order denying his renewed request
for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), as amended by the
First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. On appeal,
we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
Gorman’s informal brief argues only that the district court erred in concluding that he did
not exhaust his administrative remedies before pursuing his renewed motion. Despite its
findings on exhaustion, the court proceeded to consider the merits of Gorman’s motion,
denying relief after concluding that he did not demonstrate extraordinary and compelling
reasons justifying compassionate release. Because Gorman’s informal brief does not
challenge the district court’s dispositive ruling, he has forfeited appellate review of the
district court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The
informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited
to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
We grant Gorman’s request for leave to file his informal brief out of time. 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 --