United States v. Stephan Cotterrell

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 28, 2025
Docket24-6633
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Stephan Cotterrell (United States v. Stephan Cotterrell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Stephan Cotterrell, (4th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6633 Doc: 8 Filed: 05/28/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6633

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STEPHAN COTTERRELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cr-00063-TSK-MJA-1)

Submitted: May 19, 2025 Decided: May 28, 2025

Before AGEE, WYNN, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephan Cotterrell, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6633 Doc: 8 Filed: 05/28/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Stephan Cotterrell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. During the pendency of this appeal,

however, Cotterrell completed his term of imprisonment and was released from

incarceration. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot. See Fleet Feet, Inc. v. NIKE,

Inc., 986 F.3d 458, 463 (4th Cir. 2021) (“If an event occurs during the pendency of an

appeal that makes it impossible for a court to grant effective relief to a prevailing party,

then the appeal must be dismissed as moot.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). 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.

DISMISSED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Fleet Feet, Inc. v. Nike, Inc.
986 F.3d 458 (Fourth Circuit, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Stephan Cotterrell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-stephan-cotterrell-ca4-2025.