1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

United States of America 

 v. Case No. 2:17-cr-232-1 

Jeremy D. Nixon 

OPINION AND ORDER 

 On October 15, 2018, Defendant was convicted of being a felon 

in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) 

and 924(a)(2) (Count 1) and sentenced to a term of ninety-six 

months incarceration. According to the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), 

Defendant’s proposed release date is May 28, 2024. See

https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/ (last visited March 31, 2022). 

 On September 28, 2021, Defendant filed a pro se motion for 

compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A)(i), as 

amended by the First Step Act of 2018. (ECF No. 46.) Counsel was 

appointed to represent the defendant. On November 21, 2021, 

counsel indicated that she did not intend to supplement Defendant’s 

pro se motion. (ECF No. 47.) The government did not file a response 

to Defendant’s pro se motion. See Amended General Order 20-21 

(explaining that the government has ten days from the date of 

Defendant’s counsel’s notice of intent not to supplement to file 

a response to Defendant’s pro se motion). 

Case: 2:17-cr-00232-JLG Doc #: 48 Filed: 04/01/22 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 127
2

 Defendant requests compassionate release due to COVID-19, his 

related risk factors due to ongoing health issues, and that his 

father suffers from cancer, heart disease, and constant seizures. 

Defendant is “confined to a wheelchair and [has] several chronic 

medical conditions” (Ex. A, ECF No. 46-1 at 115), incarcerated at 

FCI Allenwood Medium in White Deer, PA, and asks to be placed on 

home confinement with his father in Columbus, Ohio. 

 Defendant submits that it would be futile for him to exhaust 

his administrative remedies, and that exhaustion is subject to 

equitable exception. (ECF No. 46 at 112.) For these reasons, 

Defendant asks the Court to decide whether his request demonstrates 

an “extraordinary and compelling reason” for release. (Id.) 

Under § 3582(c)(1)(A), a compassionate release motion may be 

filed by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, or it can be filed 

by the defendant if the defendant has exhausted his administrative 

remedies or if the defendant presents his request to the warden 

and receives no response within thirty days. United States v. Alam,

960 F.3d 831, 832 (6th Cir. 2020). While the exhaustion requirement 

is non-jurisdictional, it is a mandatory condition which must be 

enforced if the government timely objects to the failure to 

exhaust. Id. at 833-834; see also Hamer v. Neighborhood Hous. 

Servs. of Chi., 138 S. Ct. 13, 17 (2017) (finding that mandatory 

claim-processing rules “must be enforced” if “properly invoked”). 

Here, the government never responded to Defendant’s pro se

motion, so the waiver or forfeiture exceptions to the mandatory 

claim-processing rules apply. Alam, 960 F.3d at 834. 

Case: 2:17-cr-00232-JLG Doc #: 48 Filed: 04/01/22 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 128
3

 But even without the government’s objection to Defendant’s 

failure to exhaust, “[t]his Court’s analysis concerning whether a 

party has satisfied the exhaustion requirement, however, does not 

end with the Government’s waiver of the claim-processing rule.” 

United States v. Kelly, No. 2:15-cr-00247, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

201051, at *4 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 27, 2020). This Court previously 

determined that under the Sixth Circuit’s holding in United States 

v. Gaytan-Garza, 652 F.3d 680 (6th Cir. 2011), it is appropriate 

for the Court to sua sponte invoke the mandatory claims-processing 

rule due to “the need for firm, normative standards that will 

promote consistency and predictability for all parties involved, 

including the court itself” and to achieve the aims of 

“‘implement[ing] an orderly system for reviewing compassionaterelease applications’ and prevent[ing] ‘line jumping’ on the part 

of criminal defendants.” Id. at *5–6 (quoting Alam, 960 F.3d at 

834). 

 For these reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Compassionate 

Release under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) (ECF No. 46) is DENIED WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE. Mr. Nixon may renew his motion for compassionate release 

after he has exhausted his administrative remedies. 

Date: April 1, 2022 /s/James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham 

 United States District Judge 

 

Case: 2:17-cr-00232-JLG Doc #: 48 Filed: 04/01/22 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 129