Government's Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration — United States v. Aaron Ashcraft (E.D. Cal.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California · No. 2:22-cr-00087-KJM · Doc. 49 · 2024-04-17 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
PHILLIP A. TALBERT 
United States Attorney 
MATTHEW THUESEN 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
501 I Street, Suite 10-100 
Sacramento, CA 95814 
Telephone:  (916) 554-2700 
Facsimile:   (916) 554-2900  
 
Attorneys for Plaintiff 
United States of America 
 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 
                                               Plaintiff, 
 
                                     v. 
 
AARON ASHCRAFT, 
 
                                              Defendant.  
 
 
CASE NO. 2:22-CR-00087-KJM 
 
UNITED STATES’ OPPOSITION TO 
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 
RECONSIDERATION  
 
 
 
 
 
I. 
INTRODUCTION 
The United States opposes Aaron Ashcraft’s pro se motion for reconsideration of this Court’s 
denial of his compassionate release motion. ECF No. 46. The records Ashcraft provides to support his 
motion do not establish that “extraordinary and compelling” reasons warrant compassionate release. 
Even if Ashcraft could establish such reasons exist, the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) weigh heavily 
against granting Ashcraft’s motion. Consequently, and for the reasons given in the United States’ 
opposition to Ashcraft’s initial motion, ECF 41 (“Government’s Opposition”), and those that follow, this 
Court should deny Ashcraft’s reconsideration motion. 
II. 
BACKGROUND 
A. 
Relevant Procedural History 
On December 4, 2023, Ashcraft filed a motion for compassionate release based on family 
Case 2:22-cr-00087-KJM     Document 49     Filed 04/17/24     Page 1 of 4

 
2 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
circumstances, claiming that his adult son is incapable of self-care and he is the only available caregiver. 
ECF 35. On February 9, 2024, this Court denied Ashcraft’s motion, holding that, “[b]ecause defendant 
does not show 1) his child in incapable of self-care, and 2) his son’s caregiver has died or is 
incapacitated, he has not demonstrated extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant compassionate 
release.” ECF 44 at 4. Since it found that Ashcraft failed to establish extraordinary and compelling 
reasons justifying release, this Court did not address the sentencing factors under § 3553(a). Id. This 
Court’s denial of Ashcraft’s motion was without prejudice to renewal with supporting evidence. Id. 
B. 
Incarceration and Projected Release Date 
This Court initially sentenced Ashcraft to 41 months’ imprisonment. ECF 24 at 2. On January 
10, 2024, this Court reduced his sentence to 33 months based on the zero-point offender amendment. 
ECF 40. Ashcraft’s projected release date now is now January 7, 2026. Ex. 1. Ashcraft has served 
approximately seven months of his reduced sentence.  
III. 
ARGUMENT 
In his reconsideration motion, Ashcraft maintains that his son cannot care for himself and claims 
the only available caregiver is his wife, not his son’s mother or any other family member, and that she is 
mentally incapacitated and unable to care for herself. ECF 46 at 2. Ashcraft provides several pages of 
medical records to support his motion. Those records do not establish that extraordinary and compelling 
reasons justify his release. 
While the medical records confirm Ashcraft’s son’s new diagnosis, they do not provide specific 
information about his son’s needs. Regardless, those records do not support a finding that his son’s 
mother is incapacitated. Rather, they provide support for his claims related to his wife. Consequently, as 
was true at the time this Court denied Ashcraft’s initial motion, this “[C]ourt has no firm basis on which 
to conclude D.A.’s mother is incapacitated.” ECF 44 at 3. 
This Court also should deny Ashcraft’s motion on the independent ground that his requested 
relief is not warranted on consideration of the § 3553(a) factors. Based on the reasons provided in the 
Government’s Opposition, as well as those contained in the government’s sentencing memorandum, 
ECF 21 at 2-3, releasing Ashcraft now, after he has served only approximately 23% of his reduced 
sentence, would undermine the objectives of sentencing.     
Case 2:22-cr-00087-KJM     Document 49     Filed 04/17/24     Page 2 of 4

 
3 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
IV. 
CONCLUSION 
For the foregoing reasons, this Court should deny Ashcraft’s reconsideration motion.  
 
Dated: April 17, 2024 
By: 
PHILLIP A. TALBERT 
United States Attorney 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MATTHEW THUESEN 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 2:22-cr-00087-KJM     Document 49     Filed 04/17/24     Page 3 of 4

 
4 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
PHILLIP A. TALBERT 
United States Attorney 
MATTHEW THUESEN 
Assistant United States Attorney 
501 I Street, Suite 10-100 
Sacramento, CA 95814 
Telephone:  (916) 554-2700 
Facsimile:   (916) 554-2900  
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 
 
 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
v. 
 
AARON ASHCRAFT,  
 
 
 
 
Defendant. 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO. 2:22-CR-00087-KJM 
                     
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL 
 
 
 
 
 
The undersigned hereby certifies that he/she is an employee in the Office of the United States 
Attorney for the Eastern District of California and is a person of such age and discretion to be competent 
to serve papers. That on April 17, 2024, a copy of the GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION was served by 
placing said copy in a postpaid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter named, at the place(s) 
and address(es) stated below, which is/are the last known address(es), and by depositing said envelope 
and contents in the United States Mail at Sacramento, California. Addressee(s): Aaron Ashcraft 
#00025-510, FCI-Sheridan, P.O. Box 6000, Sheridan, OR 97378.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ C. Buxbaum 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
C. BUXBAUM 
 
 
Case 2:22-cr-00087-KJM     Document 49     Filed 04/17/24     Page 4 of 4

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.caed.410248.49.0.pdf

Size

149,417 bytes

SHA-256

fa2946627d4cd5b9cdfa05c08af39bfd84253719dce05a1e51950482647d2e22

Our copy

gov.uscourts.caed.410248.49.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)