United States v. Eugene Penniegraft

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 26-6249

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

EUGENE SHANER PENNIEGRAFT, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00231-TDS-2)

Submitted: August 27, 2026 Decided: September 1, 2026

Before KING, HEYTENS, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eugene Shaner Penniegraft, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:

Eugene Shaner Penniegraft appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release, brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Penniegraft’s motion. See United States v. Brown, 78 F.4th 122, 127 (4th Cir. 2023) (stating standard of review); see also United States v. Davis, 99 F.4th 647, 659 (4th Cir. 2024) (“Even if a district court abuses its discretion in assessing whether the defendant presents extraordinary and compelling reasons for release, [we] may still affirm if the district court’s consideration of the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) factors was sound.”).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Penniegraft, No.

1:08-cr-00231-TDS-2 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 30, 2026). 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