Court Opinion

ID: 9363940
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-17 22:00:55.962205+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:34.979072
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-11762   Document: 16-1    Date Filed: 01/17/2023   Page: 1 of 4

                                                [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                 In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                         ____________________

                              No. 22-11762
                         Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,
       versus
       LUIS ENRIQUE RENTERIA GRANADOS,
       a.k.a. El Viejo,
       a.k.a. El Tio,
       a.k.a. Senor,

                                                Defendant-Appellant.

                         ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-11762      Document: 16-1       Date Filed: 01/17/2023     Page: 2 of 4

       2                       Opinion of the Court                  22-11762

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Florida
                    D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-20801-WPD-1
                           ____________________

       Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit
       Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Luis Renteria Granados, a federal prisoner, appeals the de-
       nial of his motion for compassionate release. 18 U.S.C.
       § 3582(c)(1)(A). The district court ruled that Granados failed to
       identify an extraordinary and compelling reason to warrant early
       release, U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13, and the statutory sentencing factors
       weighed against granting sentencing relief, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The
       United States moves for a summary affirmance and to stay the
       briefing schedule. Because “the position of [the United States] . . . is
       clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial
       question as to the outcome of the case,” Groendyke Transp., Inc.
       v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), we grant the motion
       for summary affirmance and deny as moot the motion to stay the
       briefing schedule.
              Granados pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with intent
       to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine while on board a
       vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. 46 U.S.C.
       §§ 70503(a), 70506(b). At sentencing, the district court found the
       amount of cocaine involved—six tons—was an aggravating
USCA11 Case: 22-11762      Document: 16-1     Date Filed: 01/17/2023     Page: 3 of 4

       22-11762               Opinion of the Court                         3

       circumstance, and Granados’s age, medical issues, and attempts at
       substantial assistance were mitigating circumstances. The district
       court granted a downward variance from Granados’s advisory
       guideline range of 135 to 168 months of imprisonment and sen-
       tenced him to the mandatory minimum sentence of 120 months,
       finding that this sentence was “sufficient to promote respect for the
       law and to act as a deterrent on a 69-year-old individual.” Granados
       did not appeal.
              Granados unsuccessfully moved pro se for compassionate
       release in 2020 and 2021. In 2022, Granados again moved for com-
       passionate release. He argued that his age of 74 years and medical
       conditions increased his risk of serious illness or death from a
       COVID-19 infection and constituted an extraordinary and compel-
       ling reason to reduce his sentence. Granados also argued that his
       good behavior, rehabilitation in prison, and minimal risk to the
       public due to his age warranted a sentence reduction.
              The district court denied Granados’s motion to reduce his
       sentence. In considering the section 3553(a) factors, the district
       court stated that Granados’s offense involved “six (6) tons of co-
       caine” and that it was exercising its discretion to deny a sentence
       reduction because a reduction “would not promote respect for the
       law or act as a deterrent.” And the district court reaffirmed its pre-
       vious finding that Granados had failed to prove that his medical
       conditions rose to the level of extraordinary and compelling.
               Summary affirmance is appropriate because there is no sub-
       stantial question that Granados is not entitled to compassionate
USCA11 Case: 22-11762     Document: 16-1      Date Filed: 01/17/2023    Page: 4 of 4

       4                      Opinion of the Court                22-11762

       release. See Groendyke, 406 F.2d at 1162. Granados does not dis-
       pute that the district court had the authority to deny his motion to
       reduce based solely on its determination that relief was inappropri-
       ate based on the statutory sentencing factors. See United States v.
       Tinker, 14 F.4th 1234, 1237–38 (11th Cir. 2021). Instead, Granados
       argues that the district court abused its discretion in considering
       the statutory factors by “not getting past the ‘six tons of cocaine’
       and considering his post conviction rehabilitation.” But the district
       court was not required to afford any weight to Granados’s rehabil-
       itation, U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.3, and the district court did not
       abuse its discretion by placing greater weight on the seriousness of
       Granados’s offense and the need to provide deterrence and pro-
       mote respect for the law. See United States v. Harris, 989 F.3d 908,
       912 (11th Cir. 2021). And because we can affirm on this alternative
       ground stated by the district court, we need not address Granados’s
       arguments that his medical conditions qualified as an extraordinary
       and compelling reason to justify his early release. See Tinker, 14
       F.4th at 1237; Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678,
       680 (11th Cir. 2014).
             We GRANT the motion for summary affirmance, AFFIRM
       the denial of Granados’s motion for compassionate release, and
       DENY AS MOOT the motion to stay the briefing schedule.