*1 Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
India Perleta Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
India Perleta Smith appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Smith’s motion. See United States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review), cert. denied , 21-5624, 2021 WL 4733616 (U.S. Oct. 12, 2021); see also United States v. High , 997 F.3d 181, 189 (4th Cir. 2021) (affirming district court’s order denying compassionate release where “[t]he court’s rationale . . . was both rational and legitimate under [18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)]” and “the court sufficiently explained its denial to allow for meaningful appellate review” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Smith , No. 3:10-cr-00210-HEH-DJN-1 (E.D. Va. May 21, 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