United States v. Torres ( 2023 )

Case: 23-50236 Document: 00516931654 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/16/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
____________
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 23-50236
Summary Calendar FILED
____________ October 16, 2023
Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America, Clerk
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Ricardo Torres,
Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:15-CR-35-1
______________________________
Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Ricardo Torres, federal prisoner # 63686-380, appeals the denial of his
motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). He
argues that the district court erred by ruling that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors weighed against granting compassionate release. Specifically, he
contends that he has been rehabilitated. Torres also argues that the district
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50236 Document: 00516931654 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/16/2023
No. 23-50236
court abused its discretion by finding that he did not establish extraordinary
and compelling reasons warranting compassionate release under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
We review the denial of a motion for compassionate release for an
abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th
Cir. 2020). The district court denied Torres’s motion on the ground that he
was not entitled to compassionate release because the § 3553(a) factors did
not weigh in his favor. Specifically, the district court found that he had
committed a serious offense, he had an extensive violent criminal history, and
releasing him early was not in the interests of justice and would minimize the
seriousness of his offense. See § 3553(a). Torres’s reliance on United States
v. Jackson, 27 F.4th 1088, 1092 (5th Cir. 2022), is misplaced because, unlike
here, the district court in Jackson did not explicitly address the § 3553(a)
factors. Torres’s disagreement with the district court’s weighing of the
sentencing factors is not sufficient to demonstrate an abuse of discretion,
particularly given that Torres provides no evidence or case law establishing
that the district court based its decision on a legal error or on an erroneous
assessment of the facts. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694. Because the district
court did not abuse its discretion when it found that the § 3553(a) factors did
not support Torres’s early release, we do not reach Torres’s challenge to the
district court’s finding that he had not established extraordinary and
compelling reasons warranting compassionate release. See § 3582(c)(1)(A).
Torres has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion
in denying his motion for compassionate release. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at
693–94. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2