United States v. James Mattocks, Jr.

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6036 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/26/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6036

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES ELLIS MATTOCKS, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (4:09-cr-00017-FL-1)

Submitted: August 21, 2025 Decided: August 26, 2025

Before WILKINSON, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Ellis Mattocks, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-6036 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/26/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

James Ellis Mattocks, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for

compassionate release, brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Upon review, we

conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Mattocks’ motion.

See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (stating

standard of review); see also Chavez-Meza v. United States, 585 U.S. 109, 113 (2018) (“At

bottom, the sentencing judge need only set forth enough to satisfy the appellate court that

he has considered the parties’ arguments and has a reasoned basis for exercising his own

legal decisionmaking authority.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Accordingly, we

affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Mattocks, No. 4:09-cr-00017-FL-1

(E.D.N.C. Jan. 10, 2025). 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