United States of America v. Daniel Thomas Hersl

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-7217
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DANIEL THOMAS HERSL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:17-cr-00106-GLR-3)
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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Daniel Thomas Hersl, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Daniel Thomas Hersl 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, 132 Stat. 5194. We review the district court’s order for
abuse of discretion. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021). “A
district court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily or irrationally, fails to consider
judicially recognized factors constraining its exercise of discretion, relies on erroneous
factual or legal premises, or commits an error of law.” United States v. Dillard, 891 F.3d
151, 158 (4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted). Upon review, we conclude
that the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors did not warrant reducing Hersl’s sentence. Therefore, we affirm the district court’s
order. 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 --