IN 

ANTHONY STEVEN AGUILAR, § 

§ 

Movant, § 

§ 

VS. § NO. 4:21-CV-011-A 

§ (NO. 4:05-CR-195-A) 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, § 

§ 

Respondent. § 

ORDER 

Pursuant to the mandate of the United States Court of 

Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, this action has been remanded for 

further proceedings so that the court can reconsider the motion 

of Anthony Steven Aguilar, movant, for compassionate release in 

light of United States v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388 (5th Cir. 2021) 

The court, having considered the motion, the record, including 

the record in the underlying criminal case, No. 4:05-CR-195-A, 

and applicable authorities, finds that the motion should be 

denied. 

In Shkambi, which was decided after the court denied 

movant's motion in this case, the Fifth Circuit determined that 

neither the sentencing guidelines' policy statement nor the 

commentary is binding on the court when addressing a motion 

under§ 3582. 993 F.3d at 393. Instead, the court is bound only 

by 18 U. S . C . § 3 5 8 2 ( c ) ( 1 ) (A) and 18 U . S . C . § 3 5 5 3 (a) . 

1 

Case 4:05-cr-00195-A Document 809 Filed 05/31/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 5473
Nevertheless, the court may use the policy statement as a tool 

in its review of the motion. In sum, to prevail on a motion for 

compassionate release, the movant must still (1) show 

extraordinary reasons, (2) show that compassionate release is 

consistent with applicable policy statements, and (3) convince 

the district judge to exercise discretion to grant the motion 

after considering the§ 3553(a) factors. United States v. 

Cooper, 996 F.3d 283, 287 (5th Cir. 2021) (citing Shkambi, 993 

F.3d at 392). 

The court previously found that movant had not demonstrated 

any extraordinary and compelling reason why he should receive a 

reduction of sentence and the Fifth Circuit has not disturbed 

that finding. Movant does not appear to have a medical condition 

that would qualify as extraordinary or compelling. Nor does he 

appear to meet any other criteria of the policy statement. (As 

noted in the court's earlier opinion, movant is not eligible for 

a reduction in sentence based on amended guidelines.) 

As the court noted in its prior opinion, movant was only 47 

years of age at the time he filed his motion and is serving a 

360 month sentence. Movant's criminal history includes 

convictions for impersonating a public servant and assault 

causing bodily injury. The court cannot find that movant is not 

a danger to the safety of any other person or to the community. 

2 

Case 4:05-cr-00195-A Document 809 Filed 05/31/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 5474
Further, weighing the factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the court 

is not inclined to grant relief. 

Immediate release of movant would not be in the interest of 

justice. Rather, it would minimize the seriousness of his crimes 

and conduct and encourage every other prisoner who could not 

obtain relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to seek compassionate 

relief for extraordinary and compelling circumstances. See 

United States v. Cantu, No. 1:05-CR-458-1, 2019 WL 2498923, at 

*5 (S .D. Tex. June 17, 2019) (discussing appropriateness of 

relief where the determination is narrow and unlikely to have 

far-reaching implications); United States v. Nevers, No. 16-88, 

2019 WL 7281929, at *5-6 (E.D. La. Dec. 27, 2019) (same) In sum, 

a reduction of movant's sentence would not reflect the 

seriousness of his conduct, promote respect for the law, provide 

just punishment, or afford adequate deterrence to criminal 

conduct. 

The court ORDERS that movant•s motion for compassionate 

release be, and is hereby, denied. 

SIGNED May 31, 2022. 

// 

3 

Case 4:05-cr-00195-A Document 809 Filed 05/31/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 5475