# U n i ted S t a te s C ou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 21-3024 September Term, 2020 1: 02-c r-000 45-RCL-1 Filed O n: July 6, 20 21 United Sta tes o f

Am erica, App ellee
v . Keith B. McGill,

App ellant ON A PPE A L FROM THE UNITED STA TES DIS TRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Hend erson , W ilkins, an d Rao , Circuit Jud ges J U D G M E N T T his ap pea l was co nside red o n th e reco rd f rom the United Sta tes District Cou rt for th e District of

Colum bia a nd on the m em oran da of law and fact f iled b y

the pa rties. T he court has det ermin ed tha t th e issue s prese nte d o ccasion no ne ed for an op inion. See D.C. Cir. Rule 3 6. Upon con siderat ion o f the foregoing, th e m otion to f ile an app end ix , th e resp onse the reto, the lodged ap pen dix, the se aled ap pen dix, the m otion for lea v e to f ile a su pple me nta l app end ix , an d th e lod ged sup plem ent al ap pen dix, it is ORDERED tha t th e m otion s to f ile an ap pen dix and su pple me nta l app end ix be grant ed. T he Clerk is directed to f ile the lodged ap pen dix and su pple me nta l app end ix

. It is FURTHER ORDERED and A DJUDGED tha t th e d istrict court’s March 22, 20 21 orde r den y ing app ellant ’s mo tion for com passio nat e rele ase be af f irmed . A ppe llant requeste d co mp assion ate relea se u nde r 18 U.S.C. § 35 82(c)(1)(A), w hich, in pe rtinen t part, allows a cou rt to redu ce a de fend ant ’s sent ence if it de term ines “e xtraordin aryan d com pelling reaso ns” warrant release after co nside ring relev antfacto rs in 18 U.S.C. § 355 3(a). I n d enying appe llant’s m otion , th e d istrict court co nside red t he relevant § 355 3(a) facto rs, spe cif ically citing the na ture and circumst ance s of ap pellan t’s und erly ing of

fense s, includ ing atte mp ted m urde r of a governme nt witness; a ppe llant’s history and cha racteristics, inclu ding his co ndu ct in p rison a nd prior crimina l history; the nee d for th e se nte nce imp osed to ref lect th e se riousne ss of ap pellan t’s of

fense s, prom ote respe ct for th e law, provide just pun ishm ent , an d a f ford a dequa te d ete rrence to crim inal co ndu ct; th e n eed to prote ct th e p ublic f rom f urthe r crimes co mm itted by

# U n i ted S t a te s C ou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 21-3024 September Term, 2020
app ellant ; an d th e n eed to provide ap pellan t wi th m edica l care. Af ter co nside ring the § 355 3(a) facto rs, the district co urt co nclud ed tha t even if ap pellan t ha d d em onst rated “extraordin aryan d co mp elling reason s” for relief , th e se nte ncing facto rs on bala nce did notweigh in favor of

relea se. App ellantha s no t sho w n th at t he district cou rt ab used its discretion in d enying his mo tion. Se e Unite d S tate s v. Long, 9 97 F.3d 34 2, 3 52 (D.C. Cir. 202 1) (conclu ding tha t ab use of discretio n is th e a ppro priate stan dard of revi ew in com passio nat e rele ase app eals). Pursua nt t o D.C. Circuit Ru le 36 , th is dispo sition will no t be pu blished . T he Clerk is directe d to w ithho ld issua nce of the m and ate he rein u ntil seven d ays af ter reso lution of an y tim ely petition for rehe aring or pe tition for rehe aring en ban c. S ee Fed. R. Ap p. P. 4 1(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41

. Per Curiam
FOR THE COURT: Mark J. La nger, Clerk BY: /s/ Daniel J. Reidy Depu ty Cl erk

Page 2