Opinion — No. 3:15-cr-30023 (Dkt. 51, C.D. Ill.)
Summary
An Opinion, with a number 51 and E-FILED stamp of July 6, 2020 in the Central District of Illinois, Springfield Division (Case 3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH), United States v. Christopher Jones, by U.S. District Judge Sue E. Myerscough. The defendant pleaded guilty on June 1, 2016 to possession with intent to distribute heroin and carrying a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and was sentenced to a combined 150 months, now served at FCI Milan. He moved for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) citing his health issues and the COVID-19 pandemic, and the government opposed on exhaustion and merits grounds. The court finds he has not established extraordinary and compelling reasons and denies the pro se and amended motions, without prejudice to a later motion.
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
Cite this document
“Opinion — No. 3:15-cr-30023 (Dkt. 51, C.D. Ill.).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/opinion-no-3-15-cr-30023-dkt-51-c-d-ill-518e67a999/
, SHA-256 21c6b8468dfc90f7b82e02eed6e5b3c6c2e5dd4d85ef140dafae6c02435fb008.Full text
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 1 of 7 E-FILED
Monday, 06 July, 2020 10:07:48 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 15-cr-30023
)
CHRISTOPHER JONES, )
)
Defendant. )
OPINION
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH, U.S. District Judge:
Before the Court is Defendant Christopher Jones’ Amended
Motion for Compassionate Release (d/e 48) requesting a reduction
in his term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
On June 1, 2016, Defendant Christopher Jones pled guilty to
Count 2 of the Indictment for possession with intent to distribute
heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) and Count
3 for carrying a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). On September 30, 2016,
Defendant Jones was sentenced to a combined 150 months’
Page 1 of 7
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 2 of 7
imprisonment, consisting of 90 months on Count 2 and 60 months
on Count 3 to run consecutively to Count 2, and a 6-year term of
supervised released. Defendant is currently serving his sentence at
FCI Milan and has a projected release date of November 26, 2025.
On May 29, 2020, Defendant filed a pro se motion for
compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). See
d/e 45. On June 11, 2020, following the appointment of counsel to
represent Defendant, an Amended Motion for Compassionate
Release was filed. See d/e 48. Defendant seeks compassionate
release due to his health issues and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Defendant states that he submitted a request to BOP for
compassionate release, thus satisfying the exhaustion requirement
of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Even if his request does not satisfy the
exhaustion requirement, Defendant argues that the Court should
waive the exhaustion requirement.
On June 15, 2020, the Government filed a response opposing
Defendant’s motion. See d/e 49. The Government argues that the
Court lacks the authority to grant Defendant’s motion because
Defendant has not exhausted his administrative rights with the
Bureau of Prisons (BOP) or waited 30 days from the time a request
Page 2 of 7
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 3 of 7
to BOP regarding a motion for compassionate release was made.
The Government contends that FCI Milan does not have record of
Defendant filing for a request for a reduction in sentence with the
warden at FCI Milan. The Government also argues that Defendant
has not established extraordinary and compelling reasons to
warrant a reduction.
II. ANALYSIS
As a general matter, the Court is statutorily prohibited from
modifying a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed. See
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). However, several statutory exceptions exist,
one of which allows the Court to grant a defendant compassionate
release if certain requirements are met. See 18 U.S.C. §
3582(c)(1)(A).
Section 603(b)(1) of the First Step Act amended the statutory
language at 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). See First Step Act of 2018,
Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat 5194. Prior to the First Step Act, the
Court could grant a defendant compassionate release only if the
Director of the BOP filed a motion seeking that relief. With the
enactment of the First Step Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) now
allows an inmate to file with the Court a motion for compassionate
Page 3 of 7
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 4 of 7
release, but only after exhausting administrative review of a BOP
denial of the inmate’s request for BOP to file a motion or waiting 30
days from when the inmate made his or her request, whichever is
earlier. The statute now provides as follows:
The court, upon motion of the Director of the Bureau of
Prisons, or upon motion of the defendant after the
defendant has fully exhausted all administrative rights to
appeal a failure of the Bureau of Prisons to bring a
motion on the defendant’s behalf or the lapse of 30 days
from the receipt of such a request by the warden of the
defendant’s facility, whichever is earlier, may reduce the
term of imprisonment (and may impose a term of
probation or supervised release with or without
conditions that does not exceed the unserved portion of
the original term of imprisonment), after considering the
factors set forth in section 3553(a) to the extent that they
are applicable, if it finds that—
(i) extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a
reduction . . . and that such a reduction is consistent
with applicable policy statements issued by the
Sentencing Commission.
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
The Court finds that § 3582(c)(1)(A) does not require the Court
to wait to consider a compassionate release request if there is a
credible claim of serious and imminent harm from this pandemic.
That does not mean the Court will waive the exhaustion
requirements in all cases. The decision must be made on a case-
Page 4 of 7
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 5 of 7
by-case basis. In this case, Defendant Jones alleges that he
submitted a request to BOP for compassionate release but was not
let out and remains in custody. See Amended Motion, d/e 48, p. 5.
However, the Government disputes this as BOP alleges it has no
record of receiving said request. See Response, d/e 49. It is
possible that the request may have been lost or BOP has simply not
reviewed the request due to the constraints and limitations created
by the pandemic. Regardless, the Court excuses the requirement to
exhaust Defendant’s administrative remedies or meet the 30 days
requirement pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
Having considered the relevant factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §
3553(a), the Court concludes that Defendant has not established
that extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant a reduction in
his term of imprisonment. The spread of COVID-19 has presented
extraordinary and unprecedented challenges for the country and
poses a serious issue for prisons. Due to the infectious nature of
the virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and
state governments have advised individuals to practice good hygiene
and social distancing and isolation. Social distancing can be
difficult for individuals living or working in a prison.
Page 5 of 7
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 6 of 7
Defendant is a 26-year-old African American male. Defendant
argues that he suffers from asthma and is obese, which places him
at higher risk of serious illness or death if he contracts COVID-19.
See Amended Motion, d/e 48. However, Defendant’s asthma
appears to be controlled.
The COVID-19 pandemic does not warrant the release of every
federal prisoner with medical concerns. While the Court is
sympathetic to Defendant’s health conditions, he has not shown
that he would be at a higher risk at FCI Milan than he would be if
released. As of July 6, 2020, there are 11 inmates and 1 staff
member with active confirmed cases of COVID-19 at FCI Milan. See
COVID-19 Cases, Federal Bureau of Prisons,
https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/ (last accessed July 6, 2020).
FCI Milan has 1,323 total inmates. See FCI Milan, Federal Bureau
of Prisons, https://www.bop.gov/locations/institutions/mil/ (last
accessed July 5, 2020).
The Court must reconsider the factors in § 3553(a). Since
being incarcerated, Defendant has been disciplined twice for rule
violations. See Response, d/e 49, p. 14. On December 6, 2018, he
was sanctioned for fighting with another person. Id. On May 31,
Page 6 of 7
3:15-cr-30023-SEM-TSH # 51 Page 7 of 7
2019, he was sanctioned for being absent from assignment. Id.
Based on the history and characteristics of Defendant, the Court
finds that reconsideration of the factors in § 3553(a) concludes that
Defendant is not entitled to compassionate release.
The Court, taking all the relevant facts into account, finds that
Defendant has not established the existence of extraordinary and
compelling reasons that warrant a reduction in his term of
imprisonment.
III. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, Defendant Jones’ pro se
motion (d/e 45) and amended motion for compassionate release
(d/e 48) are DENIED. This ruling does not preclude Defendant
from filing another motion for compassionate release in the future if
circumstances change. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of
this Opinion to FCI Milan.
ENTER: July 6, 2020.
s/ Sue E. Myerscough
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 7 of 7
File and source
- File
- 51.pdf
- Size
- 106,349 bytes
- SHA-256
- 21c6b8468dfc90f7b82e02eed6e5b3c6c2e5dd4d85ef140dafae6c02435fb008
- Our copy
- 51.pdf
- Original
- No public link identified.