United States v. Anthony Wainwright, Jr.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 7, 2023
• Docket: 21-7519
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7519 Doc: 6 Filed: 04/07/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7519

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ANTHONY LEE WAINWRIGHT, JR., a/k/a Youngin,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Senior District Judge. (4:10-cr-00016-RBS-TEM- 1)

Submitted: April 4, 2023 Decided: April 7, 2023

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Lee Wainwright, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-7519 Doc: 6 Filed: 04/07/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Anthony Lee Wainwright, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his

motion for compassionate release after finding his arguments were not cognizable under

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A); United States v. McCoy, 981 F.3d 271 (4th Cir. 2020), but were

properly raised under 28 U.S.C. § 2255; and his motion was an unauthorized, successive

§ 2255 motion. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm the district court’s order. See United States v. Ferguson, 55 F.4th 262, 270-72

(4th Cir. 2022). We deny a certificate of appealability as unnecessary. See Harbison v.

Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009); United States v. Williams, 56 F.4th 366, 370 n.3 (4th Cir.

2023); United States v. McRae, 793 F.3d 392, 400 (4th Cir. 2015). 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

* We previously denied Wainwright authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion to assert his challenges to the validity of his 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) convictions, because he could not make a plausible claim for relief. See United States v. Crawley, 2 F.4th 257, 263 (4th Cir. 2021); United States v. Ali, 991 F.3d 561, 574 (4th Cir. 2021); In re Thomas, 988 F.3d 783, 790 (4th Cir. 2021); United States v. Mathis, 932 F.3d 242, 266 (4th Cir. 2019).