United States v. Corieal Holmes

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6168

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CORIEAL LAROME HOLMES, a/k/a Cory,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:17-cr-00210-FDW-DSC-1)

Submitted: June 24, 2021 Decided: June 29, 2021

Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Corieal Larome Holmes, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Corieal Larome Holmes appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for

compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step Act

of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. On appeal, we confine

our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because

Holmes’ informal brief does not challenge a dispositive basis for the district court’s

disposition—specifically, that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors counseled against his

release—he has forfeited appellate review of that finding. See 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.”). Accordingly, we

deny Holmes’ motions to appoint counsel and 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