Court Opinion

ID: 9391273
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-01 19:00:24.900705+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:40.486408
License: Public Domain

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

                        UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                             FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
                                 _______________

                                      No. 22-2700
                                    _______________

                            UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                                             v.

                              DAVID CRESPO, a/k/a Spray,
                                                   Appellant
                                  _______________

                     On Appeal from the United States District Court
                               for the District of New Jersey
                                (D.C. Crim. No. 13-00428)
                     U.S. District Judge: Honorable Robert B. Kugler
                                     _______________
                      Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)
                                  on April 28, 2023

                Before: JORDAN, KRAUSE, and BIBAS, Circuit Judges

                                   (Filed: May 1, 2023)
                                    _______________

                                       OPINION*
                                    _______________

BIBAS, Circuit Judge.

    David Crespo is serving a ten-year federal prison sentence for his role in a large

methamphetamine conspiracy. He seeks compassionate release based on the COVID-19

pandemic, his health conditions, and his family members’ ailments. The District Court

*
  This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and, under I.O.P. 5.7, is not binding
precedent.
denied his motion without prejudice. It found that he had not presented extraordinary and

compelling reasons for release and that the sentencing factors counseled against letting him

out early. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, we will affirm. United States v. Pawlowski,

967 F.3d 327, 330 (3d Cir. 2020).

   First, Crespo argues that the District Court should not have consulted U.S. Sentencing

Guideline § 1B1.13 because it was superseded by the First Step Act. But as the Court noted,

that Guideline remains a “useful guide” to what counts as “extraordinary and compelling.”

Supp. App. 4 (second quotation from U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(1)(A)); accord United States v.

Andrews, 12 F.4th 255, 259–60 (3d Cir. 2021).

   Second, the District Court properly discounted Crespo’s COVID concerns. Crespo is

fully vaccinated, as are many inmates and staff. His prison had no active COVID cases

among prisoners and only three among staff.

   Third, Crespo’s health conditions do not warrant relief. Though his hypertension and

obesity put him at greater risk if he contracted COVID, they do not make that risk

extraordinary, especially since he is vaccinated. He has a mass on his neck, but there is no

evidence that it is cancerous, and he is getting testing and treatment for it. Although Crespo

suffers from anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, and suicidal ideation, those mental

conditions bear largely on the hardships of prison generally, which the District Court

already considered at sentencing. And he is getting adequate medical and mental-health

treatment.

   Fourth, Crespo says he has been assaulted and raped in prison. As the District Court

noted, these allegations are “extremely disturbing.” Supp. App. 9 n.5. The right path to

                                              2
relief, though, is through prison administrative processes or a civil-rights lawsuit, not a

sentence reduction.

   Fifth, Crespo’s family conditions do not necessitate relief either. His desire to care for

his ailing parents is laudable, but not an extraordinary or compelling reason to release him.

And though the mother of his children has ailments too, the District Court found that she

can still care for the children.

   Finally, the District Court properly weighed the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a). Crespo stresses that his crime was nonviolent, that his role in the conspiracy was

marginal, and that he has rehabilitated himself. But his crime was serious, he has a long

criminal record, and he has served only about two-thirds of his sentence. So the District

Court found that he needed to stay in prison to face just punishment and deter him from

future crime. Because the District Court properly applied the law and did not abuse its

discretion in weighing these factors, we will affirm.

                                             3