US v. Lorenzo Butts, No. 21-7615 (4th Cir. 2022)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-7615 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LORENZO BUTTS, a/k/a Lorenza Butts, a/k/a Lorenzo Butts, Jr., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:00-cr-00067-AWA-1) Submitted: May 10, 2022 Decided: May 17, 2022 Before MOTZ, HARRIS, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lorenzo Butts, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Attias, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lorenzo Butts appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. This court remanded the court’s original order denying Butts’ motion because it had relied in part on an erroneous factual premise. The court reevaluated Butts’ motion on remand and denied relief. We review a court’s order granting or denying a compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion. United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.) (stating standard of review), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion. The court denied compassionate release after assuming Butts had demonstrated extraordinary and compelling circumstances and reviewing the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 188-91 (4th Cir. 2021) (discussing amount of explanation required for denial of straightforward compassionate release motion). We therefore affirm the district court’s order. We deny Butts’ motion to appoint counsel and to accelerate case processing. 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.