United States v. Samuel Blancher

── United States v. Samuel Blancher ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: June 03, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 25-6120 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/03/2026 Pg: 1 of 5 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-6120 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SAMUEL CLINT BLANCHER, Defendant - Appellant. No. 25-6121 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SAMUEL CLINT BLANCHER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (5:02-cr-00004-MOC-1; 5:03-cr- 00007-MOC-1) Submitted: May 21, 2026 Decided: June 3, 2026 USCA4 Appeal: 25-6120 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/03/2026 Pg: 2 of 5 Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Megan C. Hoffman, First Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Russ Ferguson, United States Attorney, Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-6120 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/03/2026 Pg: 3 of 5 PER CURIAM: Samuel Clint Blancher appeals the district court’s order denying his motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) for compassionate release. The district court determined that Blancher had not established extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release and, even if Blancher had done so, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weighed against his request for relief. On appeal, Blancher questions whether the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for compassionate release. We affirm. “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582, a court generally may not modify a sentence ‘once it has been imposed.’” United States v. Melvin, 105 F.4th 620, 623 (4th Cir. 2024) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)). “But a district court may reduce a sentence through a motion for compassionate release.” United States v. Bond, 56 F.4th 381, 383 (4th Cir. 2023) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)). We review the denial of a motion for compassionate release for abuse of discretion. United States v. Brown, 78 F.4th 122, 127 (4th Cir. 2023). “In doing so, we ensure that the district court has not acted arbitrarily or irrationally, has followed the statutory requirements, and has conducted the necessary analysis for exercising its discretion.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). “Under this standard, this [c]ourt may not substitute its judgment for that of the district court.” United States v. Bethea, 54 F.4th 826, 832 (4th Cir. 2022) (internal quotation marks omitted). “In analyzing a motion for compassionate release, [a] district court[] must determine: (1) whether extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction; and (2) that such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” United States v. Malone, 57 F.4th 167, 173 (4th Cir. 2023). 3 USCA4 Appeal: 25-6120 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/0