The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
23-7190•United States of America v. Ted Duckett
23-7190Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 16, 2024
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-7190
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TED DUCKETT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:13-cr-00626-TDC-1)
Submitted: April 11, 2024 Decided: April 16, 2024
Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ted Duckett, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Ted Duckett appeals the district court’s orders denying his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release and denying his motion for
reconsideration, which the district construed as a new compassionate release motion. We
review a district court’s denial of a compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion.
United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021). We have reviewed the record
and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Duckett’s
motions for compassionate release. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 188-91 (4th
Cir. 2021) (discussing amount of explanation required for denial of compassionate release
motion). Accordingly, we grant Duckett’s motion to amend his informal brief and affirm
the district court’s orders. United States v. Duckett, No. 8:13-cr-00626-TDC-1 (D. Md.
filed Oct. 17, 2023 & entered Oct. 18, 2023; filed Jan. 23, 2024 & entered Jan. 24, 2024).
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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.