United States of America v. Jacob Bowling, a/k/a Jakey, a/k/a Ghost, a/k/a Fred

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6005
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JACOB BOWLING, a/k/a Jakey, a/k/a Ghost, a/k/a Fred,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cr-00267-CCB-10)
Submitted: June 28, 2022 Decided: July 1, 2022
Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jacob Bowling, Appellant Pro Se. Christina Ann Hoffman, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Jacob Bowling appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release based on the COVID-19 pandemic.
We review the denial of a motion for compassionate release for abuse of discretion. United
States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021).
Upon review, we discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s alternate ruling
that the totality of the circumstances in this case, evaluated in light of the pertinent 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, did not warrant the grant of compassionate release or
a sentence reduction. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 187 (4th Cir. 2021).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Bowling, No. 1:16-cr-
00267-CCB-10 (D. Md. Dec. 8, 2021). We deny Bowling’s motions to appoint counsel.
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 --