UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeremy Alexander DOE, Defendant-Appellant.
Jeremy Alexander Doe appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Doe's informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court's disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court's order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order.* 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. To the extent Doe seeks to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, his appeal is untimely. See Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007) (“[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.”). To the extent Doe seeks to appeal his criminal judgment, his notice of appeal is duplicative of a prior appeal of the same judgment. United States v. Doe, 328 F. App'x 850 (4th Cir. 2009).
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.