US v. Vincent Manning, No. 20-7787 (4th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-7787 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VINCENT MARLOUS MANNING, a/k/a V-Tek, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (1:10-cr-00466-MBS-8) Submitted: March 29, 2021 Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent Marlous Manning, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Decided: April 5, 2021 PER CURIAM: Vincent Marlous Manning appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Manning’s motion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020) (stating standard). Accordingly, we deny Manning’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Manning, No. 1:10-cr-00466-MBS-8 (D.S.C. Oct. 7, 2020). 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

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.