United States v. Whitehead ( 2021 )

Case: 20-10769 Document: 00515793806 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/24/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 24, 2021
No. 20-10769
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
George Whitehead, Jr.,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:07-CR-11-1
Before King, Smith, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
George Whitehead, Jr., federal prisoner #35653-177, appeals the
district court’s denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). In that motion, Whitehead argued that he
should be granted compassionate release because of his underlying medical
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-10769 Document: 00515793806 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/24/2021
No. 20-10769
conditions, which put him at an increased risk of serious illness or death due
to COVID-19.
We review the denial of a motion for compassionate release for abuse
of discretion. United States v. Thompson, 984 F.3d 431, 433 (5th Cir. 2021).
“[A] court abuses its discretion if it 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).
Whitehead argues that he is eligible for compassionate release because
his medical conditions qualify as extraordinary and compelling reasons to
reduce his sentence, given the spread of COVID-19 at his prison facility. The
Government concedes that Whitehead has demonstrated extraordinary and
compelling reasons for compassionate release on account of his medical
conditions, and we accept that concession. See United States v. Courtney, 979
F.2d 45, 51 (5th Cir. 1992).
But the district court determined that even if Whitehead’s medical
conditions qualified as extraordinary and compelling reasons, it still would
not grant a sentence reduction. Noting Whitehead’s extensive criminal
record, his assaultive behavior, his possession of firearms, and the court’s
concern that reducing Whitehead’s sentence would minimize the
seriousness of Whitehead’s conduct, the court weighed the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) factors and concluded that it would not grant a sentence reduction.
When considering a motion for a reduction of sentence under
§ 3582(c), the district court “is in a superior position to find facts and judge
their import under § 3553(a) in the individual case.” Chambliss, 948 F.3d at
693 (quoting Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007)). We thus “give
deference” to the district court’s application of the § 3553(a) factors. See id.
2
Case: 20-10769 Document: 00515793806 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/24/2021
No. 20-10769
Whitehead’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by
not considering his medical conditions is refuted by the record, as is his
contention that the district court failed to weigh the § 3553(a) factors.
Further, Whitehead’s argument that the district court should have
considered § 3553(a)(2)(D) reflects nothing more than a disagreement with
the district court’s balancing of the sentencing factors, which is insufficient
to establish an abuse of discretion and “not a sufficient ground for reversal.”
Id. at 694.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.
Whitehead’s motion to appoint counsel, his request for emergency judicial
notice, and his motion to expedite the appeal are DENIED AS MOOT.
3