Antonio Edwards, a/k/a Tank v. United States of America

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6058
ANTONIO EDWARDS, a/k/a Tank,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:13-cr-00650-DKC-3)
Submitted: May 24, 2022 Decided: May 27, 2022
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Antonio Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Bijon Ali Mostoufi, Special Assistant United States
Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Edwards appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release.* 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.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). We have reviewed the record and
conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion and sufficiently explained the reasons
for the denial. 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 affirm the district court’s order, and we grant Edwards’ “motion of declaration to cure
deficiencies upon consideration for extension of time.” 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
* In his informal brief, Edwards challenges various aspects of his convictions and
sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Because Edwards did not raise these claims in
the district court and does not present any exceptional circumstances, these issues are not
properly before us. In re Under Seal, 749 F.3d 276, 285 (4th Cir. 2014) (“Our settled rule
is simple: absent exceptional circumstances, we do not consider issues raised for the first
time on appeal.” (cleaned up)).

-- 2 of 2 --