United States v. Moore

Case: 21-50109 Document: 00516134118 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/16/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
December 16, 2021
No. 21-50109 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Lamar Leon Moore,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 7:19-CR-31-1
Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
In 2019, Lamar Leon Moore, federal prisoner # 24989-480, was
convicted of possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of actual
methamphetamine and sentenced to 210 months of imprisonment and five
years of supervised release. In 2020, Moore moved for compassionate
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-50109 Document: 00516134118 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/16/2021
No. 21-50109
release based on the COVID-19 pandemic, the prison’s failure to protect
inmates from the virus, his health, and the need to act as a caregiver for his
mother and to be a father to his children.
We review a district court’s denial of compassionate release for abuse
of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir.
2020). An abuse of discretion occurs if the district court “bases its decision
on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.” Id.(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Here, the district court denied relief on the merits “[a]fter
considering the applicable factors provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and the
applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission, as well
as taking into consideration [Moore’s] criminal activity while incarcerated.”
The Government concedes that there is no evidence of Moore engaging in
criminal activity while incarcerated but has not shown that the district
court’s erroneous assessment of the evidence was harmless. See United
States v. Garcia, 655 F.3d 426, 432 (5th Cir. 2011).
Accordingly, the order denying compassionate release pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) is VACATED, and this matter is REMANDED
for the district court’s reconsideration.
2