United States v. Valdez

Case: 22-40824 Document: 00516779427 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/08/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
____________ FILED
June 8, 2023
No. 22-40824 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
____________
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Jesus Valdez,
Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:16-CR-800-1
______________________________
Before Jones, Smith, and Southwick, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Jesus Valdez was convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine and was sentenced to
262 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release. He appeals
the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release.
Valdez maintains that (1) his medical records showed an extraordinary
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40824 Document: 00516779427 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/08/2023
No. 22-40824
and compelling reason for compassionate release; (2) even if he were to file a
civil-rights lawsuit alleging that he was not receiving adequate medical care
in prison, that would not resolve his current situation; (3) the district court
abused its power by sending a United States Marshal to his mother’s house
several times while it considered his compassionate-release motion; and
(4) the sentencing factors should be considered specifically in the context of
a compassionate-release motion.
We review the denial of compassionate release for abuse of discretion.
United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). A district court
may modify a sentence, after considering the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors, if “extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction”
and “such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements.”
§ 3582(c)(1)(A). Although not dispositive, the commentary to U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.13 “informs our analysis as to what reasons may be sufficiently ‘extra-
ordinary and compelling’ to merit compassionate release.” United States v.
Thompson, 984 F.3d 431, 433 (5th Cir. 2021).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Val-
dez’s health conditions were not “extraordinary and compelling reasons” to
reduce his sentence under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). See Chambliss, 948 F.3d
at 693–94. Nor did the court abuse its discretion in determining that the rel-
evant § 3553(a) factors militated against a reduction based on Valdez’s crim-
inal history and the danger he posed to the public. See id. at 693.
AFFIRMED.
2