Court Opinion

ID: 9385640
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-07 18:00:53.082294+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:03.498226
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-40860     Document: 00516704657         Page: 1     Date Filed: 04/07/2023

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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                         April 7, 2023
                                  No. 21-40860                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Juan Gabriel Cisneros,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 1:94-CR-181-12

   Before King, Jones, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          In 1995, a jury convicted Juan Gabriel Cisneros, federal prisoner
   # 40178-079, of three counts of possession with intent to distribute in excess
   of 100 kilograms of marijuana, one count of conspiracy to possess with intent
   to distribute in excess of 1,000 kilograms of marijuana, and one count of
   money laundering. The district court sentenced him concurrently to 20 years

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-40860       Document: 00516704657          Page: 2    Date Filed: 04/07/2023

                                     No. 21-40860

   of imprisonment on the money-laundering count and to 30 years of
   imprisonment on each of the three drug-trafficking counts.             Because
   Cisneros’s sentence was enhanced pursuant to former 21 U.S.C.
   § 841(b)(1)(A), he received a mandatory life sentence on the conspiracy
   count.

            Cisneros challenges the district court’s denial of his motion for
   compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We review the
   court’s action for abuse of discretion and find neither an error of law nor a
   clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence. United States v. Cooper,
   996 F.3d 283, 286 (5th Cir. 2021).

            Cisneros presented the district court with four separate “factors” that
   he maintained combined to amount to extraordinary and compelling reasons
   warranting a sentence reduction to 30 years on the conspiracy count. These
   factors included (1) that the law no longer mandates a life sentence for the
   conspiracy count, although the statutory change was nonretroactive; (2) the
   disparity between his sentence and that of co-indictees who pled guilty;
   (3) his rehabilitative efforts while in prison; and (4) a clean prison record.
   Cisneros argues that the district court addressed those four factors
   individually but did not consider them in combination with one another. He
   also argues that the district court was required to but did not consider the
   18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors before denying relief and that it
   improperly considered his pro se filings.
            Having carefully reviewed the district court’s reasoned order, the
   record, and the parties’ arguments, we conclude that the district court did
   not abuse its discretion in denying Cisneros’s motion. The district court
   considered and rejected Cisneros’s argument that the four “factors,” taken
   together, constituted “extraordinary and compelling reasons” warranting

                                           2
Case: 21-40860        Document: 00516704657              Page: 3       Date Filed: 04/07/2023

                                         No. 21-40860

   compassionate release. 1 As this court has explained, the district court did not
   need to reach the Section 3553(a) factors after making that threshold
   determination. United States v. Jackson, 27 F.4th 1088, 1093 n.8 (5th Cir.
   2022) (citing United States v. Thompson, 984 F.3d 431, 433–35 (5th Cir.
   2021)). And the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering
   Cisneros’s pro se filings, which contained ad hominem attacks on the
   magistrate judge; they bore directly on the compassionate release inquiry,
   and the district court, while entitled to consider them, did not give them
   undue weight. 2
           For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is
   AFFIRMED.

           1
             This court has recently rejected Cisneros’s principal argument that non-
   retroactive sentencing changes made by the First Step Act can support a compassionate
   release motion. McMaryion v. United States, --- F.4th ---, 2023 WL 2658434, *1 (5th Cir.
   2023) (“[A] prisoner may not leverage non-retroactive changes in criminal law to support
   a compassionate release motion.”).
           2
            Cisneros relies on United States v. Gerezano-Rosales, 692 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 2012).
   That case involved an original sentencing procedure, and the court expressly declined to
   address whether Section 3553(a) permits a district court to consider disrespectful
   statements made by a defendant. Id. at 401. It is therefore inapposite.

                                                3