Court Opinion

ID: 9841231
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-21 18:01:03.432685+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:32.639697
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30364         Document: 00516903462             Page: 1      Date Filed: 09/21/2023

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

                                                                                       FILED
                                       No. 22-30364                           September 21, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                     ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   James Gaharan,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 2:19-CR-136-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          James Gaharan, federal prisoner # 21078-035, appeals the denials of
   his motion for compassionate release, filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
   § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), and his motion for reconsideration. We review each of
   those denials for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948

         _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-30364        Document: 00516903462        Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/21/2023

                                    No. 22-30364

   F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020); Trevino v. City of Fort Worth, 944 F.3d 567, 570
   (5th Cir. 2019).
          The district court denied Gaharan compassionate release because,
   inter alia, it determined that reducing his 97-month sentence for possession
   of child pornography would neither adequately deter him from criminal
   conduct nor reflect the seriousness of his offense.           See 18 U.S.C.
   § 3553(a)(2)(A)-(B). Although Gaharan relies on United States v. Sauseda,
   No. 21-50210, 2022 WL 989371 (5th Cir. Apr. 1, 2022), to support his
   contention that the district court failed to provide an adequate explanation
   for denying him compassionate release, Sauseda is readily distinguishable; in
   that case, unlike this one, the judge who denied the § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion
   was not the same judge who sentenced the movant, the Government had not
   filed any response to the motion, and the district court did not cite any
   specific § 3553(a) factors in support of its denial order. Sauseda, 2022 WL
   989371, 1-3. The district court in the instant case, which denied relief after
   summarizing relevant parts of the record and making clear that it had
   considered the parties’ arguments, was not required to provide a more
   thorough explanation. See Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959,
   1965 (2018) (“In some cases, it may be sufficient for purposes of appellate
   review that the judge simply relied upon the record, while making clear that
   he or she has considered the parties’ arguments and taken account of the
   § 3553(a) factors.”).
          Contrary to Gaharan’s contentions, the Government expressly argued
   that his sexual abuse of his minor student supported the denial of
   § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) relief based upon the § 3553(a) factors. In any event, any
   Government failure to address those factors would not have precluded the
   district from considering them. See Ward v. United States, 11 F.4th 354, 360-
   62 (5th Cir. 2021).

                                         2
Case: 22-30364     Document: 00516903462           Page: 3   Date Filed: 09/21/2023

                                    No. 22-30364

          Gaharan raised in his § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) pleadings his instant
   arguments that he is unlikely to recidivate in light of his post-sentencing
   conduct and his PATTERN score; the district court, which indicated that it
   had considered his pleadings, was not required to accept his arguments or
   provide a point-by-point rebuttal of them. See Concepcion v. United States,
   142 S. Ct. 2389, 2404-05 (2022). Although Gaharan contends that his is a
   non-contact offense and, therefore, not sufficiently serious to warrant the
   denial of his § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion, his assertion is belied by
   unchallenged facts contained in the presentence report and his receipt,
   without objection, of an offense-level increase for engaging in a pattern of
   activity involving the sexual abuse and exploitation of a minor student. See
   U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(5).
          In short, Gaharan’s disagreement with the district court’s weighing of
   the § 3553(a) factors does not establish that the district court abused its
   discretion. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694; Trevino, 944 F.3d at 570. We
   need not consider his contention that the district court erred in finding that
   he failed to show extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting relief. See
   Ward, 11 F.4th at 360-62.
          AFFIRMED.

                                         3