US v. Chandra Padgett, No. 17-4013 (4th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-4013 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHANDRA PADGETT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:14-cr-00167-JFA-1) Submitted: May 25, 2017 Decided: May 31, 2017 Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Chandra Padgett, Appellant Pro Se. Tommie DeWayne Pearson, Anne Hunter Young, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Chandra Padgett seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Government’s motion in her criminal case. Our review of the district court’s order is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (2012). United States v. Davis, 679 F.3d 190, 193 (4th Cir. 2012). While the statute gives us “jurisdiction to hear challenges to the lawfulness of the method used by the district court in making its sentencing decision,” we lack “jurisdiction to review any part of a discretionary sentencing decision.” Id. at 194. Because the sole issue Padgett raises on appeal challenges the district court’s discretionary sentencing decision, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
