Court Opinion

ID: 9384494
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-04 00:00:25.2391+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:53.811689
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11151        Document: 00516698590             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/03/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-11151
                                    Summary Calendar                                   FILED
                                    ____________                                     April 3, 2023
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                         Clerk

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Joshua William Jackson,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 3:16-CR-196-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Haynes, Engelhardt, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Joshua William Jackson, federal prisoner # 54191-177, seeks to
   proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the denial of his motion for
   compassionate release, filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
   Jackson contends that the district court failed to consider and provide
   sufficient reasons for concluding that the following extraordinary and
   compelling reasons did not warrant compassionate release: (1) intervening
         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11151        Document: 00516698590          Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/03/2023

                                      No. 22-11151

   changes in law render his 18 U.S.C. § 922(n) conviction unconstitutional;
   (2) the district court misapplied the Sentencing Guidelines when calculating
   his 156-month sentence; (3) his repeated COVID-19 infections; (4) his
   inability to be vaccinated due to allergies; (4) his rehabilitative efforts since
   sentencing; and (5) his eligibility to receive time credits pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
   § 3632(d). Jackson further argues that the district court abused its discretion
   in denying relief based solely on the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.
   § 3553(a)(2), without consideration and explanation of the remaining
   § 3553(a) factors.
          Here, the district court explicitly stated that it had considered
   Jackson’s     arguments      for    a    lower     sentence,    including    his
   postsentence rehabilitation and the intervening changes in law cited by
   Jackson, when concluding that compassionate release was not warranted
   under a balancing of the § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See Chavez-Meza v.
   United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965 (2018). Jackson’s disagreement with how
   the district court balanced the § 3553(a) sentencing factors is insufficient to
   demonstrate a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. See United States v. Chambliss,
   948 F.3d 691, 694 (5th Cir. 2020); Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th
   Cir. 1983).
          Accordingly, Jackson has failed to show a nonfrivolous issue with
   respect to the district court’s denial of his motion for compassionate release
   based on a balancing of the § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See id. at 693. As
   such, this court need not consider Jackson’s contention that extraordinary
   and compelling reasons justified relief. See United States v. Jackson, 27 F.4th
   1088, 1093 n.8 (5th Cir. 2022); Ward v. United States, 11 F.4th 354, 360-62
   (5th Cir. 2021).
          Jackson failed to heed the district court’s warning regarding the filing
   of repetitive motions seeking a sentence reduction or compassionate release.

                                               2
Case: 22-11151      Document: 00516698590           Page: 3    Date Filed: 04/03/2023

                                     No. 22-11151

   Instead, he continued to file repetitive motions, as well as a letter threatening
   to continue to do so “every 60 to 90 days.” Therefore, Jackson does not
   demonstrate a nonfrivolous issue with respect to whether the district court
   abused its inherent power to impose a sanction requiring Jackson to obtain
   the consent of the district court prior to filing any future motion seeking a
   sentence reduction or compassionate release. See Gelabert v. Lynaugh, 894
   F.2d 746, 747-48 (5th Cir. 1990); see also Murphy v. Collins, 26 F.3d 541, 544
   (5th Cir. 1990) (upholding a pre-filing review procedure).
          The appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See
   Howard, 707 F.2d at 220. Jackson’s motion to proceed IFP on appeal is
   DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

                                              3