United States v. Danny Fabricant ( 2023 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 20 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 21-50180
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:03-cr-01257-RSWL-1
v.
DANNY FABRICANT, AKA Daniel Joseph MEMORANDUM*
Fabricant, AKA Danny Joseph Fabricant,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 14, 2023**
Before: SILVERMAN, SUNG, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.
Danny Fabricant appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion
for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, see United
States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021), we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The district court concluded that, even if Fabricant had shown extraordinary
and compelling reasons, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors did not support relief.
Fabricant argues that the district court abused its discretion in reaching this
conclusion because it: relied too heavily on his non-violent criminal history;
erroneously found that his age, health conditions, and release plan would not
preclude him from committing new crimes if he were released; and gave
insufficient weight to his sentencing disparity arguments, including the fact that his
mandatory minimum would be 10 years, rather than life, if he were sentenced
today. Given “the deference we must afford the district court when it makes these
discretionary decisions,” see Keller, 2 F.4th at 1284, we cannot conclude that the
district court abused its discretion in finding that Fabricant’s aggravating
circumstances, including his very lengthy—if nonviolent—criminal history,
outweighed the mitigating factors cited by Fabricant. Moreover, although the court
did not address each of Fabricant’s arguments, it adequately explained its decision
to deny relief. See United States v. Wright, 46 F.4th 938, 948-53 (9th Cir. 2022).
In view of this conclusion, we do not reach Fabricant’s arguments regarding
the district court’s extraordinary and compelling analysis. See id. at 948 (if the
district court independently denies relief under § 3553(a), any error in assessing the
other statutory requirements is harmless).
AFFIRMED.
2 21-50180