UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

Criminal Case No. 15-20445

v. Honorable Linda V. Parker

TERRANCE A. KIMBLE,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 

COMPASSIONATE RELEASE

On November 4, 2014, Defendant pleaded guilty to Interference with 

Commerce by Robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 2 (Count 1) and 

Using or Carrying a Firearm During and in Relation to a Crime of Violence in 

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) (Count 2). (Plea Agreement, ECF No. 40 

at Pg. ID 76.) On January 19, 2016, this Court sentenced Defendant to consecutive 

terms of imprisonment of 110 months on Count 1 and 120 months on Count 2, 

followed by 24 months of supervised release. (Judgment, ECF No. 46.) 

According to the Government, Defendant’s projected release date is March 5, 

2032. This matter is presently before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for 

Compassionate Release. (ECF No. 48). For the following reasons, the Court 

denies Defendant’s motion.

Case 4:15-cr-20445-LVP-MJH ECF No. 56, PageID.290 Filed 08/18/21 Page 1 of 6
APPLICABLE LAW

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), a defendant may move for compassionate 

release only after “fully exhaust[ing] 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.” 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).

Under the statute, a court may reduce a defendant’s term of imprisonment if 

it finds that “extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction” and 

after considering the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) to the extent they are 

applicable. 18 U.S.C.§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i); see also United States v. Jones, 980 F.3d 

1098, 1113 (6th Cir. 2020). The burden is on the defendant to prove that 

“extraordinary and compelling reasons” exist to justify release under the statute. 

See, e.g., United States v. Kannell, No. 20-12635, 2021 WL 223485, at *1 (11th 

Cir. Jan. 22, 2021) (“The movant bears the burden of proving entitlement to relief 

under section 3582”); United States v. Melgarejo, 830 F. App’x 776, 778 (7th Cir. 

2020) (“[the defendant] did not meet his burden of demonstrating that his 

circumstances were extraordinary and compelling”); cf. United States v. McClain, 

691 F.3d 774, 777 (6th Cir. 2012) (holding that the defendant bears the burden to 

show he is entitled to reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)).

Case 4:15-cr-20445-LVP-MJH ECF No. 56, PageID.291 Filed 08/18/21 Page 2 of 6
The factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) include a defendant’s history 

and characteristics; the nature and circumstances of the crimes; due consideration 

of the seriousness of the crimes; promoting respect for the law; providing just 

punishment; affording adequate deterrence; protecting the public from further 

crimes by the defendant; and providing him with any necessary correctional 

services and treatment. See 18 U.S.C. §3553(a).

ANALYSIS

The Government does not dispute that Defendant exhausted his 

administrative remedies. (ECF No. 51 at Pg. ID 146.) On January 20, 2021, after 

review of Defendant’s last comprehensive medical summary, the warden where 

Defendant is incarcerated denied his request for compassionate release. (See ECF 

No. 48 at Pg. ID 136.)

To demonstrate an extraordinary and compelling reason to warrant a 

reduction in his sentence, Defendant relies on the fact that he contracted COVID19 while a resident at Terre-Haute United States Penitentiary. Defendant’s 

medical records confirm that he contracted the virus in late December 2020. (See 

ECF No. 52-1 at Pg ID 177, 206, 214.) Defendant is 24 years old and does not 

claim to have a medical condition that increases his risk of severe illness if he 

contracts COVID-19—much less one identified by the CDC as presenting such an 

Case 4:15-cr-20445-LVP-MJH ECF No. 56, PageID.292 Filed 08/18/21 Page 3 of 6
increased risk. (See ECF No. 48.) Further, Defendant’s Bureau of Prison medical 

records do not reflect such a condition. (See ECF Nos. 52-1 & 52-2.)

Defendant claims that he experienced loss of taste and smell, loss of 

appetite, head and body aches, and other COVID-19 related symptoms. (ECF No. 

48 at Pg. ID 135, 137-138.) Defendant’s contraction of COVID-19—particularly 

where he did not suffer severe complications and has since recovered—weighs 

against finding extraordinary and compelling circumstances. Therefore, his 

reasons for release are not “extraordinary and compelling.” Further, the § 3553(a)

factors do not support Defendant’s release.

First, Defendant has been involved in a number of violent crimes.

Defendant was charged in this case with four counts of Hobbs Act robbery and 

four counts of using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. These

offenses are serious in nature due to the presence of a firearm and the potential of 

harm to the victims. On four occasions, Defendant possessed a handgun during a 

robbery. During these robberies, Defendant brandished the firearm and, at least 

twice, pointed the weapon at individuals. (Plea Agreement, ECF No. 40 at Pg ID 

77-79.) Defendant fired his weapon at individuals during two robberies. (See id.) 

Prior to the instant offenses, Defendant amassed a lengthy criminal record

despite his relatively young age. (See PSR ¶¶ 62-66.) In 2013, Defendant was 

charged with Breaking and Entering and Possession of a Firearm after he broke 

Case 4:15-cr-20445-LVP-MJH ECF No. 56, PageID.293 Filed 08/18/21 Page 4 of 6
into a home, and police found him in the upstairs of the residence. (Id. ¶ 63.) 

Defendant was placed in a residential detention program, followed by intensive 

probation. (Id.) Defendant assaulted a fellow inmate while in the detention 

program for the 2013 offense, resulting in his termination from the program and 

conviction for assault and battery, for which he received nine-months probation. 

(Id. ¶¶ 63-64.) A probation warrant violation was issued on May 7, 2014, due to 

Defendant’s failure to notify his probation officer of his discharge from the 

residential program and for pushing an employee at the facility. (Id. ¶ 64.) In 

2014, Defendant got into a fight at Academy West Alternative School, a school 

that he did not attend, and had to forcibly be taken into custody. (Id. ¶ 65.) 

Defendant was convicted of hindering and a fine was imposed. (Id.)

While in pretrial custody in the Midland County Jail for the instant offense, 

Defendant assaulted a fellow inmate and was sentenced to a 46-day term of 

imprisonment. (Id. ¶ 66.) While in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons, 

Defendant has accumulated 23 disciplinary infractions. (ECF No. 51-2.) Four of 

the infractions involved Defendant’s possession of a dangerous weapon or 

hazardous tool. (Id.) Surveillance video showed Defendant attempting to stab an 

inmate with a homemade weapon during one assault. (Id. at Pg ID 172.)

Second, at sentencing the Court found the imposed sentence to be warranted

under the circumstances which repeatedly involved violent acts. Defendant’s 

Case 4:15-cr-20445-LVP-MJH ECF No. 56, PageID.294 Filed 08/18/21 Page 5 of 6
conduct while incarcerated has provided further reasons why his continued 

incarceration is necessary. The violent nature of the instant offenses and the other 

extreme cases of violence displayed in Defendant’s criminal history collectively 

provide significant reasons for denying his request for release. The benefit of 

keeping Defendant incarcerated outweighs the risk posed to the public if he is 

released. Granting Defendant’s motion and releasing him at this time will not

appropriately “reflect[s] the seriousness of the offense,” “promote[s] respect for the 

law,” or “provide[s] just punishment for the offense.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Compassionate Release is

DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of

record and/or pro se parties on this date, August 18, 2021, by electronic and/or

U.S. First Class mail.

s/Aaron Flanigan

Case Manager

s/ Linda V. Parker

LINDA V. PARKER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: August 18, 2021

Case 4:15-cr-20445-LVP-MJH ECF No. 56, PageID.295 Filed 08/18/21 Page 6 of 6