Order — United States v. Chapon (Dkt. 163, D. Nev.)

Summary

An Order in United States of America v. Karen Chapon, Case No. 2:20-CR-00286-JCM-NJK, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, dated April 16, 2025. The court rules on the defendant's pro se motion for compassionate release (ECF No. 151) under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), the supplement filed by appointed CJA counsel, and the government's response. It recounts that she pled guilty to one count of Bank Fraud in March 2024, was sentenced to 30 months in custody and has served approximately 8 months. After weighing the factors, the court denies compassionate release and grants the government's motion to seal Exhibit A of its response (ECF No. 160).

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Case 2:20-cr-00286-JCM-NJK         Document 163       Filed 04/16/25      Page 1 of 5



1
                                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2

3                                       DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        CASE NO.: 2:20-CR-00286-JCM-NJK
5                   Plaintiff,
6                                                     ORDER
     vs.
7
     KAREN CHAPON,
8
                    Defendant.
9

10           Presently before the court is defendant Karen Chapon’s pro se motion for compassionate
11
     release. (ECF No. 151). Chapon’s appointed CJA counsel filed a supplement in support of her
12
     motion. (ECF No. 157). The government filed a response (ECF No. 158), to which Chapon
13
     replied (ECF No. 161). For the reasons stated below, the court DENIES Chapon’s request for
14

15   compassionate release.

16           Also before the court is the government’s motion to seal Exhibit A of its response. (ECF
17
     No. 160).
18
             I.     Background
19
             Karen Chapon pled guilty to one count of Bank Fraud in March 2024 and was sentenced
20

21   to 30 months in custody. (ECF No. 146). Chapon has served approximately 8 months of her

22   sentence. On January 2, 2025, Chapon filed a motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18
23
     U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). (ECF No. 151). The court then appointed CJA counsel to determine
24
     Chapon’s eligibility for compassionate release. (ECF No. 155).
25
             II.    Legal Standard
26

27           Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), a court may, in certain circumstances, grant a

28   defendant's motion for compassionate release and reduce his term of incarceration to time served.

         Case 2:20-cr-00286-JCM-NJK            Document 163         Filed 04/16/25     Page 2 of 5



1    Before filing such a motion, the defendant must first petition the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) for
2
     compassionate release. Id. The court may grant the defendant's motion only if it was filed “after
3
     the defendant has fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure of the [BOP] to
4
     bring a motion on the defendant's behalf” or after 30 days have lapsed “from the receipt of such a
5

6    request by the warden of the defendant's facility, whichever is earlier.” Id.

7           To grant compassionate release, the court must consider whether: (1) “extraordinary and
8
     compelling reasons” warrant release; (2) release would be “consistent with applicable policy
9
     statements issued by the Sentencing Commission;” and (3) release is warranted under the
10
     “particular circumstances of the case” based on the factors outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
11

12   United States v. Wright, 46 F.4th 938, 945 (9th Cir. 2022). “Although a district court must

13   conclude that a defendant satisfies all three predicates before granting a motion for
14
     compassionate release, it may deny compassionate release if a defendant fails to satisfy any of
15
     these grounds.” Id.
16
            Under the most recent U.S. Sentencing Guidelines amendment, “extraordinary and
17

18   compelling reasons” include (1) the defendant’s medical circumstances; (2) the defendant’s age;

19   (3) the defendant’s family circumstances; (4) whether the defendant was a victim of abuse while
20
     serving his term of imprisonment; and (5) “other circumstance or combination of circumstances
21
     that, when considered by themselves or together with any of the reasons described above warrant
22
     compassionate release.” U.S.S.G. 1B1.13(b).
23

24          The court need not “provide a lengthy explanation” for its decision on compassionate

25   release so long as “context and the record reflect that [it] considered the defendant’s substantive
26
     arguments and offered a reasoned basis” for its decision. Wright, 46 F.4th, at 950 (citations
27
     omitted). Ultimately, the decision to grant or deny compassionate release is within the district
28

         Case 2:20-cr-00286-JCM-NJK             Document 163         Filed 04/16/25      Page 3 of 5



1    court’s discretion, but the defendant bears the burden of establishing his eligibility for
2
     compassionate release. Id. at 951; United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1284 (9th Cir. 2021).
3
             III.    Discussion
4
         As an initial matter, and with good cause appearing, the court grants the government’s
5

6    motion to seal the defendant’s medical records. (ECF No. 160).

7        A. Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons Warranting a Sentence Reduction
8
             After considering the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and Sentencing Commission
9
     policy statements, the court finds that compassionate release is not warranted in this case. In
10
     order to justify compassionate release, a defendant must show that her medical condition
11

12   substantially diminishes her ability to provide self-care within the environment of a correctional

13   facility and that she is not expected to recover from the condition(s). U.S.S.G. §1B1.13.
14
             Chapon argues she is suffering from chronic migraines and is receiving insufficient care
15
     for hormone replacement therapy and other conditions. (ECF No. 151). Deterioration of a
16
     medical condition and insufficient medical care can weigh in favor of compassionate release.
17

18   United States v. Russell, 1:21-cr-00158-DCN-2, 2024 WL 4851154 (D. Idaho Nov. 21, 2024).

19   But the important question is whether the defendant is suffering from a medical condition that
20
     requires long-term or specialized medical care that is not being provided, and without which the
21
     defendant is at risk of serious deterioration in health. Id.; U.S.S.G. §1B1.13(b)(1)(C). Chapon
22
     falls short of that standard.
23

24           First, the record reflects that Chapon was prescribed daily medication to treat her

25   migraines while in prison. See ECF No. 159 at 2 (Chapon’s Medical Records, filed under seal).
26
     Suffering from persistent migraines, without more, is insufficient to warrant release. Chapon
27
     also contends that she requires bloodwork to stabilize her postmenopausal hormone therapy
28

           Case 2:20-cr-00286-JCM-NJK         Document 163        Filed 04/16/25      Page 4 of 5



1    regimen which has been delayed. But Chapon’s motion is silent as to how her condition
2
     substantially diminishes her ability to care for herself. U.S.S.G. §1B1.13(b)(1)(C).
3
             Moreover, Chapon fails to demonstrate how her condition is worsening or placing her at
4
     risk of serious health deterioration. Russel, 2024 WL 4851154. Indeed, Chapon contends that
5

6    because of her family history of cancer, she is at “heightened risk for hormone-related

7    malignancies.” ECF No. 161 at 3. But the mere possibility that Chapon may experience new
8
     medical conditions based on family history is not extraordinary, nor compelling.
9
             Chapon also argues that her family circumstances necessitate her release, claiming both
10
     her mother and mother-in-law require assisted care. To succeed, Chapon must make “a robust
11

12   evidentiary showing” that she is the only available caregiver to her mother and mother-in-law,

13   which she has not done. United States v. Bragg, No. 12CR3617-CAB (S.D. Cal. February 19,
14
     2021) (internal quotations omitted). Here, Chapon concedes she and her partner share the
15
     responsibility of caring for her mother-in-law. ECF No. 161 at 4.
16
             Further, Chapon alleges that her mother suffered two trans ischemic attacks and is in
17

18   deteriorating health. While the court empathizes with Chapon’s circumstances, the deterioration

19   of family members’ health does not constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons to warrant
20
     release. United States v. Baye, 464 F.Supp.3d 1178 (D. Nev. 2020) (declining compassionate
21
     release because “[m]any, if not all inmates, have aging and sick parents”) (quoting United States
22
     v. Ingram, No. 2:14-cr-40, 2019 WL 3162305 at *2 (S.D. Ohio July 16, 2019).
23

24           Based on the foregoing reasons, the court finds Chapon does not present extraordinary or

25   compelling reasons for compassionate release.
26
     ...
27
     ...
28

         Case 2:20-cr-00286-JCM-NJK            Document 163        Filed 04/16/25       Page 5 of 5



1           B.        U.S.S.G. § 3553(a) Sentencing Factors
2
            Even if Chapon demonstrated extraordinary or compelling reasons for compassionate
3
     release, the court finds the applicable sentencing guideline factors weigh against release. See 18
4
     U.S.C. § 3553. Chapon pled guilty to one count of Bank Fraud and was sentenced to 30 months
5

6    in custody. She has an underlying criminal history involving fraud. Most importantly, Chapon

7    served only approximately 4 months of her sentence before filing the instant motion, which the
8
     court finds insufficient to achieve its sentencing goal. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).
9
            Therefore, having considered Chapon’s arguments and the applicable sentencing
10
     guideline factors, the court finds compassionate release is not warranted at this time.
11

12          IV.       Conclusion

13          Accordingly,
14
            IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Chapon’s motion for
15
     compassionate release (ECF Nos. 151) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED, in accordance with
16
     the foregoing.
17

18           IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the government’s motion to seal (ECF No. 160) be, and

19   the same hereby is, GRANTED.
20
            DATED: April 16, 2025.
21

22

23
                                                              UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
24

25

26

27

28

File and source

File

163.pdf

Size

101,216 bytes

SHA-256

467e01746be3e3baebd32703ebfacd4b9c3139819b387ae470e81301dd199cb2

Our copy

163.pdf