United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-40566

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jamed Nasmir Colmenares Fierro,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-295-3

Before Jolly, Willett, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Jamed Nasmir Colmenares Fierro, federal prisoner #26311-078, 

appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for compassionate release 

under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). On appeal, he argues that he has shown 

extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting compassionate release. 

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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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

June 30, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-40566 Document: 00516378031 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/30/2022
No. 21-40566

2

Specifically, he contends that his latent tuberculosis puts him at a heightened 

risk of serious illness or death due to COVID–19 infection. He also argues 

that the district court erred in finding that the sentencing factors set forth in 

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) counseled against releasing him. We AFFIRM.

We review a denial of a motion for compassionate release for abuse of 

discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). 

Here, the district court issued a thorough, 19-page opinion finding that 

Colmenares Fierro’s medical condition was not an “extraordinary and 

compelling reason[]” that warranted release under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) and that the § 3553(a) factors likewise counseled against 

release. See United States v. Colmenares Fierro, No. 4:12-CR-295 (3), 2021 WL 

2806942 (E.D. Tex. July 2, 2021). Neither holding was an abuse of discretion. 

First, as the district court pointed out, prison medical staff had 

recommended treatment for Colmenares Fierro’s latent tuberculosis, but he 

refused. The district court soundly reasoned that, “[u]nder these 

circumstances, his declining the recommended treatment for latent 

tuberculosis . . . precludes him from relying on this condition as a basis for 

compassionate release.” Id. at *6 n.6; accord United States v. Glasper, 854 F. 

App’x 748, 750 (7th Cir. 2021); United States v. Broomfield, No. 20-14514, 

2022 WL 896825, at *1 (11th Cir. Mar. 28, 2022).

1 Colmenares Fierro also 

fails to show clear error in the district court’s finding, based on infection and 

fatality rates, that “the facility where [he] is housed is handling the 

1 Colmenares Fierro admits in his brief that he refused the treatment but claims he 

did so because he was diagnosed with hepatitis in 1993 and suspected that the tuberculosis 

treatment might cause liver issues. This argument, however, was never presented to the 

court below and has thus been forfeited. See McClellon v. Lone Star Gas Co., 66 F.3d 98, 100 

(5th Cir. 1995). Moreover, the district court determined that “Colmenares Fierro’s records 

do not reflect . . . that he has . . . hepatitis,” 2021 WL 2806942, at *6—a finding he does 

not acknowledge or contest on appeal.

Case: 21-40566 Document: 00516378031 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/30/2022
No. 21-40566

3

[COVID–19] outbreak appropriately and providing adequate medical care.” 

2021 WL 2806942, at *7. That care includes making the COVID vaccine 

available to inmates. The district court appropriately cited the facility’s 

health-related measures as a factor counseling against a finding of

extraordinary circumstances warranting Colmenares Fierro’s release. Id. All 

things considered, the district court justifiably concluded that Colmenares 

Fierro does not face the kind of heightened vulnerability to COVID that 

might warrant compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). See United 

States v. Thompson, 984 F.3d 431, 433–35 (5th Cir. 2021).

Second, besidesfinding that extraordinary and compelling reasons did 

not warrant release, the district court determined in the alternative that the 

factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) also counseled against release.

Specifically, in light of the nature and circumstances of Colmenares Fierro’s 

offense of conviction, his criminal history, the large amount of cocaine 

involved, his leadership role in an international drug-trafficking organization, 

and the fact that he has only served approximately 32% of his sentence, the 

district court concluded that granting Colmenares Fierro early release would 

not promote adequate deterrence, protect the public from further crimes, 

reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote respect for the law, or provide 

just punishment. See § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(A)-(C). We find no abuse of 

discretion in this conclusion—which, as the district court correctly noted, 

serves as a basis for denying compassionate release independent of that 

court’s § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) holding. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693–94. To the 

extent that Colmenares Fierro disagrees with the district court’s weighing of 

the § 3553(a) factors, he has failed to show “a sufficient ground for reversal.” 

Id. at 694.

For these reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-40566 Document: 00516378031 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/30/2022