United States of America v. Keonte K. Yorkshire, a/k/a Tae

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6394
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KEONTE K. YORKSHIRE, a/k/a Tae,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, Senior District Judge. (2:18-cr-00177-RAJ-LRL-9)
Submitted: November 20, 2025 Decided: November 24, 2025
Before THACKER, HARRIS, AND QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Keonte K. Yorkshire, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Keonte K. Yorkshire appeals the district court’s order granting in part and denying
in part his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction.* We have reviewed the
record in conjunction with the issues raised in Yorkshire’s informal brief. See 4th Cir. R.
34(b); see also 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.”). After review, we conclude that the district court did not
reversibly err when it denied Yorkshire’s request for a greater reduction than the one the
court granted. See Concepcion v. United States, 597 U.S. 481, 501 (2022) (explaining that
“[t]he broad discretion that the First Step Act affords to district courts . . . counsels in favor
of deferential appellate review”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United
States v. Yorkshire, No. 2:18-cr-00177-RAJ-LRL-9 (E.D. Va. Apr. 9, 2025). 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
* Yorkshire moves for the appointment of counsel on appeal, and we deny that
motion.

-- 2 of 2 --