United States v. Amos Scott ( 2022 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7619
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
AMOS JUNIOR SCOTT, a/k/a Crazy,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:00-cr-00069-MR-5)
Submitted: March 29, 2022 Decided: April 1, 2022
Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Amos Junior Scott, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Amos Junior Scott, a federal prisoner serving a life sentence, appeals the district
court’s orders denying Scott’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate
release, and denying reconsideration. We review a district court’s denial of a motion for
compassionate release for abuse of discretion. United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329
(4th Cir.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021).
In the appealed-from orders, the district court assumed the arguments advanced by
Scott satisfied the “extraordinary and compelling” standard under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) and
proceeded to weigh the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. The court ultimately found,
though, that the § 3553(a) factors did not countenance the grant of relief in this case. Upon
review, we discern no abuse of discretion in the court’s analysis. Id. at 331-32 (holding
that, even if extraordinary and compelling circumstances exist, courts may deny
compassionate release if § 3553(a) factors counsel against reduction). We therefore affirm
the district court’s orders. United States v. Scott, No. 1:00-cr-00069-MR-5 (W.D.N.C. July
26, 2021 & Oct. 26, 2021). We deny Scott’s motion to appoint 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
2