US v. Matthew Hightower, No. 21-6388 (4th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-6388 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MATTHEW HIGHTOWER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge. (1:15-cr-00322-GJH-3) Submitted: November 9, 2021 Decided: November 18, 2021 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew Hightower, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Matthew Hightower appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 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, challenging the adequacy of the court’s explanation. Although the court’s explanation could have been more robust, we conclude that it was sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review in light of the facts of Hightower’s case. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 187-91 (4th Cir. 2021) (discussing extent of explanation required in compassionate-release cases). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hightower’s motion, and we affirm the court’s order. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (stating standard), cert. denied, No. 21-5624, 2021 WL 4733616 (U.S. Oct. 12, 2021). 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.
