United States v. Whitman ( 2021 )

Case: 20-10624 Document: 00515908758 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/22/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 22, 2021
No. 20-10624
Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Michelle Renee Whitman,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
No. 2:17-CR-27-1
Before King, Smith, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Michelle Whitman pleaded guilty to two counts of uttering and pos-
sessing a counterfeit security and was sentenced to 210 months in prison and
a three-year term of supervised release. She appeals the denial of her motion
for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opin-
ion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances
set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-10624 Document: 00515908758 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/22/2021
No. 20-10624
The question whether Whitman exhausted her claims is not jurisdic-
tional. See United States v. Franco, 973 F.3d 465, 467−68 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied, 141 S. Ct. 920 (2020). Accordingly, we need not decide the propriety
of the district court’s exhaustion determination because the judgment may
be affirmed on other grounds. See id.; see also United States v. Chacon,
742 F.3d 219, 220 (5th Cir. 2014).
We review a decision denying compassionate release for an abuse of
discretion. United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). A
district court abuses its discretion when its decision is grounded in a legal
error or clearly erroneous facts. Id.Although the district court mentioned U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 in its order,
there is nothing in the record to indicate that it felt bound by that guideline
and its commentary. Instead, the record shows that the denial was based on
its balancing of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and that it did not abuse its
discretion by denying the motion. See United States v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388,
393 (5th Cir. 2021); Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693.
Whitman’s arguments amount to a disagreement with the district
court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors, which does not suffice to show
error. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694. Accordingly, the judgment is
AFFIRMED.
2