Court Opinion

ID: 9892837
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-25 00:00:25.151284+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:47:32.437540
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-51011       Document: 00516942979             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/24/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                 Fifth Circuit

                                    ____________                               FILED
                                                                         October 24, 2023
                                      No. 20-51011                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                    ____________                               Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                           versus

   Steve Maurice Tyler,

                                             Defendant—Appellant.
                    ______________________________

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Texas
                             USDC No. 7:16-CR-128-5
                    ______________________________

   Before Jones, Stewart, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Appellant Steve Tyler pled guilty in 2016 to conspiracy to possess
   280 grams or more of cocaine base with intent to distribute. The district
   court (Junell, J.) sentenced him to a statutory minimum 240-months of
   imprisonment. 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) (2010). We affirmed in part and

          _____________________
          *
              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   should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set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.
Case: 20-51011      Document: 00516942979           Page: 2    Date Filed: 10/24/2023

                                     No. 20-51011

   remanded in part. Having received the district court’s more complete
   explanation of its order, we now AFFIRM.
          Tyler moved for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
   § 3582(c)(1)(A). The government filed a response, and the district court
   (Counts, J.) denied the motion as follows: “After considering the applicable
   factors provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and the applicable policy statements
   issued by the Sentencing Commission, the Court DENIES the Defendant’s
   Motions [sic] on its merits.”        Tyler then filed a timely motion for
   reconsideration, which the court likewise denied.
          Tyler now appeals the denial of his motion for compassionate release.
   We review the district court’s decision for abuse of discretion. United States
   v. Cooper, 996 F.3d 283, 286 (5th Cir. 2021).
          Tyler argues that the district court erred in failing to assess whether
   his allegations established “extraordinary and compelling reasons”
   warranting a reduction in his sentence. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). He
   also asserts that the district court erroneously considered U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13
   to be binding.     These contentions lack merit, as the district court’s
   assessment of the § 3553(a) factors furnished an independent and adequate
   basis for denying Tyler’s motion. See United States v. Escajeda, 58 F.4th 184,
   188 (5th Cir. 2023); United States v. Rollins, 53 F.4th 353, 358 (5th Cir. 2022).
          Tyler additionally argues that the district court erred by perfunctorily
   denying his motion. Our remand to the district court cured the procedural
   deficiency. The district court noted overwhelming reasons as to why the
   § 3553(a) factors do not support a reduced prison term, based on Tyler’s
   repeated and longstanding drug trafficking, even while on supervised release.
   And the court found that the Section 3553(a) factors do not support early
   release based on defendant’s criminal history.          This explanation was
   sufficient.

                                              2
Case: 20-51011   Document: 00516942979          Page: 3   Date Filed: 10/24/2023

                                 No. 20-51011

         This court’s order denying early release is AFFIRMED.

                                          3