United States v. Judith Cossette

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 24 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 21-30232
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 9:19-cr-00016-DWM-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JUDITH JOHANNA COSSETTE,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2022**
Before: SILVERMAN, MILLER, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.
Judith Johanna Cossette appeals from the district court’s order denying her
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. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 799 (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).
Cossette asserts that she is entitled to compassionate release in light of her
vulnerability to COVID-19, amendments to the safety valve provision of 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(f), and because she does not pose a danger to the community. She further
contends that the district court failed to consider her arguments or explain
adequately its decision to deny relief. The record reflects that the district court
considered each of Cossette’s arguments and sufficiently explained its
determination that, though Cossette’s medical conditions may constitute an
extraordinary and compelling reason for release, release was nonetheless
unwarranted in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, including the
seriousness of the offense and her history of threatening violence. See Chavez-
Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965-67 (2018). The court did not abuse
its discretion in reaching this conclusion. See United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278,
1284 (9th Cir. 2021) (district court may deny compassionate release based on the
§ 3553(a) factors alone); see also United States v. Robertson, 895 F.3d 1206, 1213
(9th Cir. 2018) (district court abuses its discretion only if its decision is illogical,
implausible, or without support in the record).
AFFIRMED.
2 21-30232