United States v. Darryle Robertson

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 21-6710 Doc: 14 Filed: 08/03/2022 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6710

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DARRYLE EDWARD ROBERTSON, a/k/a Tiger,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:01-cr-00304-GLR-3)

Submitted: July 22, 2022 Decided: August 3, 2022

Before AGEE, RUSHING, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Darryle Edward Robertson, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Scott Tsuei, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-6710 Doc: 14 Filed: 08/03/2022 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Darryle Edward Robertson appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for

a sentence reduction pursuant to Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub L.

No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

After finding that Robertson was eligible for a sentence reduction, the court considered the

statutory range, the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)

sentencing factors, and Robertson’s post-sentencing conduct and rehabilitative efforts. See

United States v. Collington, 995 F.3d 347, 358-61 (4th Cir. 2021). The court reasonably

determined that the nature and circumstances of Robertson’s offense and other appropriate

factors weighed against a sentence reduction. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

order. United States v. Robertson, No. 1:01-cr-00304-GLR-3 (D. Md. Apr. 19, 2021). We

deny the motions for appointment of counsel. 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