Court Opinion

ID: 9908769
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-11 19:00:35.71548+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:30.157546
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50338         Document: 00516996177             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/11/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-50338
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                              December 11, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Ismael Serna Moreno,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 3:09-CR-2327-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Willett, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Ismael Serna Moreno, a 59-year-old federal prisoner who has served
   approximately half of his 300-month sentence, appeals the district court’s
   denial of his motion for compassionate release. He argues that he has
   presented extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting his release under
   18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) and that, in denying his motion, the district erred
   by treating the policy statement in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 as binding.

          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50338      Document: 00516996177           Page: 2    Date Filed: 12/11/2023

                                     No. 23-50338

          We start with Moreno’s alleged error of law: that the district court
   improperly treated the policy statement in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 as binding.
   Though Moreno raises this issue as one of two in his brief, he dedicates no
   argument to it. He merely recites the governing law and does not explain how
   the district court failed to follow it. The absence of argument would
   ordinarily result in forfeiture. See United States v. Fernandez, 48 F.4th 405,
   412 (5th Cir. 2022). But Moreno is proceeding pro se and urges us to construe
   his briefing liberally. See Collins v. Dall. Leadership Found., 77 F.4th 327, 330
   (5th Cir. 2023). Even so, we see no error in the district court’s order below.
   In denying Moreno’s motion, the district court specifically noted that the
   policy statement in the sentencing guidelines was non-binding and correctly
   cited our decision in United States v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388, 392 (5th Cir.
   2021), for that proposition. Thus, even assuming Moreno has made this
   argument (and construing that argument liberally), we find it without merit.
          But even if we were to agree with Moreno that the district court
   somehow erred in its treatment of § 1B1.13, it would not matter because its
   decision was independently supported by the sentencing factors. As we
   observed in United States v. Jackson, this court has “regularly affirmed the
   denial of a compassion-release motion—even in cases with a Shkambi
   problem—where the district court’s weighing of the Section 3553(a) factors
   can independently support its judgment.” 27 F.4th 1088, 1093 n.8 (5th Cir.
   2022). Here, the district court noted the nature of Moreno’s crimes—nine
   robberies while brandishing his gun or threatening his victims with one—and
   found that releasing him now, halfway through his sentence, would neither
   adequately deter criminal conduct nor avoid unwarranted sentencing
   disparities among similarly situated defendants.
          We do not understand Moreno’s brief—again, liberally construed—
   to challenge the district court’s decision under the sentencing factors. There
   is also nothing in Moreno’s underlying motion before the district court which

                                          2
Case: 23-50338     Document: 00516996177           Page: 3   Date Filed: 12/11/2023

                                    No. 23-50338

   suggested that a reweighing of the § 3553(a) factors warranted a 12-year
   reduction in his sentence—a sentence to which he already received a
   significant downward variance. Thus, even giving Moreno every benefit of
   the doubt, we fail to see any abuse of discretion in the district court’s
   decision. See Jackson, 27 F.4th at 1091.
          Having determined that the district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a)
   factors independently supports its decision, we need not consider whether
   Moreno has presented extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying
   release. The judgment of the district court is accordingly AFFIRMED.

                                         3