United States of America v. Timothy Sean Scheetz, a/k/a G, a/k/a Germ

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-6711
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TIMOTHY SEAN SCHEETZ, a/k/a G, a/k/a Germ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:00-cr-00078-BO-1)
Submitted: April 4, 2024 Decided: May 31, 2024
Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Mark R. Sigmon, MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS
GROSSMAN, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Michael F. Easley, Jr.,
United States Attorney, Andrew A. Kasper, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Sean Scheetz appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for
compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step
Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. On appeal, Scheetz
argues that the district court erroneously denied his motion for compassionate release
without considering the arguments he raised in support of his motion and that the court
abused its discretion in applying the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors to deny the motion. After
reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
denying Scheetz’s motion. See United States v. Brown, 78 F.4th 122, 127 (4th Cir. 2023)
(stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United
States v. Scheetz, No. 7:00-cr-00078-BO-1 (E.D.N.C. July 14, 2023). We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --