United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-40845

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Justin Ryan Serna, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:15-CR-652-1

Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Justin Ryan Serna, federal prisoner # 92519-379, appeals from the 

district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion requesting 

a compassionate release reduction in his sentence based on his health 

conditions and the COVID-19 pandemic. The district court ruled that early 

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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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

August 11, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-40845 Document: 00515974703 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/11/2021
No. 20-40845

2

release was not appropriate in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Before 

this court, Serna maintains that the district court failed to consider and give 

adequate weight to factors in favor of release. Specifically, he contends that 

the district court should have given weight to his request for home 

incarceration for all or part of his 10-year supervised release term, which 

would limit the danger he would pose to the community. In addition, he 

asserts that the court should have taken into account of his post-sentencing 

rehabilitation efforts and a finding by the Bureau of Prisons that he was 

unlikely to recidivate.

We review the district court’s decision to deny a prisoner’s motion 

for compassionate release for an abuse of discretion. United States v. 

Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). Because Serna filed the motion 

for compassionate release, the district court’s decision is “bound only by 

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) and . . . the sentencing factors in § 3553(a).” United States 

v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388, 393 (5th Cir. 2021). Here, the district court 

considered the nature of Serna’s offense and concluded that early release 

would not reflect the seriousness of the underlying crime, promote respect 

for the law, provide just punishment or deterrence, or protect the public. 

The record reflects that the district court knew and understood 

Serna’s arguments in favor of his request for a reduction. See United States 

v. Robinson, 980 F.3d 454, 465 (5th Cir. 2020). Serna’s suggestion that the 

district court did not correctly and adequately weigh the factors that could 

favor a modification amounts to a disagreement with the court’s balancing of 

the sentencing factors, but a “sentencing judge is in a superior position to 

find facts and judge their import under § 3553 in the individual case,” and we 

therefore afford deference to the district court’s consideration of the 

§ 3553(a) factors. Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693 (quoting Gall v. United States, 

552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007)). Serna’s displeasure with the district court’s 

balancing of the factors that he believes support his request for a reduction 

Case: 20-40845 Document: 00515974703 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/11/2021
No. 20-40845

3

does not establish that the district court abused its discretion. Chambliss, 948 

F.3d at 694. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case: 20-40845 Document: 00515974703 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/11/2021