Renaldo Keitron Meadows appeals the district courts 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, and dismissing his request for home confinement. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Meadows’ motion for compassionate release. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (stating standard). We further conclude that Meadows has forfeited appellate review of the courts dismissal of his request for home confinement by failing to challenge that ruling in his informal brief. 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 courts judgment. 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
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.