United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-30282

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Chris Walker, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:05-CR-297-1

Before Barksdale, Graves, Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

In 2007, Chris Walker, federal prisoner # 29622-034, pleaded guilty 

to: conspiracy to distribute, and possess with intent to distribute, 50 grams 

or more of cocaine base, 500 grams or more of cocaine hydrochloride, and 

marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846 (count one);

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 22, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-30282 Document: 00515789778 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/22/2021
No. 20-30282

2

possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base, 500 

grams or more of cocaine hydrochloride, and marijuana, in violation of

§§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1) (count two); felon in possession of a firearm, in 

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (count three); conspiracy to murder a 

federal agent, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1117 (count four); and 

solicitation to murder a federal witness, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 373 (count 

seven). Walker was sentenced to, inter alia, life imprisonment.

Walker challenges the district court’s denial of his motion for a 

reduced sentence, in which Walker requested relief pursuant to § 404 of the

First Step Act of 2018 (First Step Act), Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 

5194, 5222 (2018). Reducing a sentence pursuant to the First Step Act is 

generally reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Jackson, 945 F.3d 

315, 319 (5th Cir. 2019). (Walker also contends the court committed 

procedural error and his sentence is substantively unreasonable; but these 

claims are foreclosed. See United States v. Batiste, 980 F.3d 466, 479–80 (5th 

Cir. 2020).)

The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (made retroactive by the First Step 

Act) lowered Walker’s sentences for counts one and two from mandatory 

minimums of life imprisonment to mandatory minimums of 120-months’ 

imprisonment, respectively. The First Step Act did not affect Walker’s other 

sentences (including, inter alia, life imprisonment for count four), resulting 

in a modified Sentencing Guidelines sentencing range of 360 months to life. 

According to Walker, the denial of his motion for a reduced sentence failed 

to consider the impact of the First Step Act on his sentences for counts one 

and two, the goals of the Fair Sentencing Act, and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) 

sentencing factors. 

Walker has not shown the district court abused its discretion. The 

court acknowledged Walker’s claims and the changes in the law, correctly set 

Case: 20-30282 Document: 00515789778 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/22/2021
No. 20-30282

3

forth the circumstances of his case, and denied relief based on the § 3553(a) 

factors. See Id. at 478 (“[I]t is more plausible . . . that the district court, 

having evaluated all pertinent factors, simply exercised its statutory 

discretion to deny the motion [pursuant to § 404]”). Contrary to Walker’s 

assertion, the court “was not required to provide reasons or explain its 

consideration of the § 3553(a) factors” in considering his motion for a 

reduced sentence. Id. at 479. 

AFFIRMED.

Case: 20-30282 Document: 00515789778 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/22/2021