United States v. Tobar ( 2021 )

Case: 21-50148 Document: 00516117182 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/03/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
December 3, 2021
No. 21-50148 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Brittney Aloni Solis Tobar,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 6:18-CR-10-2
Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Brittney Aloni Solis Tobar, federal prisoner #06931-480, is serving a
240-month sentence for her convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent
to distribute at least 500 grams of methamphetamine and being a felon in
possession of a firearm. She appeals the district court’s denial of her motion
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-50148 Document: 00516117182 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/03/2021
No. 21-50148
for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). She argues
that the district court failed to give reasons for finding that she was a danger
to the safety of another person or the community pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.13(2), p.s., that it erred in determining that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors did not support an early release, and that it failed to provide specific
instances regarding her history and characteristics that did not justify a
reduced sentence. While she contends that she suffers from asthma and that
she is needed at home to care for her children, those facts, which were not
presented to the district court, will not be considered. See Leverette v.
Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir. 1999); Theriot v. Parish of
Jefferson, 185 F.3d 477, 491 n.26 (5th Cir. 1999). Also, she has abandoned her
argument regarding the calculation of her guidelines range. See Yohey v.
Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).
We review for an abuse of discretion, which occurs when a district
court “bases its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment
of the evidence.” United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir.
2020) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Because Tobar filed
the motion in question, the district court was “bound only by
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) and . . . the sentencing factors in § 3553(a).” United States
v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388, 393 (5th Cir. 2021).
The district court determined that the § 3553(a) factors weighed
against a sentence reduction. Tobar’s mere disagreement with the court’s
balancing of the § 3553(a) factors “is not a sufficient ground for reversal.”
Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694. Moreover, the district court stated it had
conducted a “complete review of the motion on the merits” and then cited
specific facts and § 3553(a) factors as its bases for concluding that
compassionate release was not warranted under § 3553(a). Its explanation
for the sentence was sufficient. See United States v. Chavez-Meza, 138 S. Ct.
1959, 1965 (2018). Because we affirm on the basis of the district court’s
2
Case: 21-50148 Document: 00516117182 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/03/2021
No. 21-50148
§ 3553(a) analysis, we need not address Tobar’s challenge to the district
court’s determination that compassionate release was also not warranted
under the § 1B1.13(2) policy statement. See United States v. Chacon, 742 F.3d
219, 220 (5th Cir. 2014). The order of the district court is AFFIRMED.
3