Court Opinion

ID: 9951150
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-15 18:01:18.946578+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:37:31.821962
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30384           Document: 43-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/15/2024

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

                                                                                  FILED
                                   No. 23-30384                           March 15, 2024
                                 Summary Calendar
                                 ____________                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
United States of America,

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Marlo Helmstetter,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                           USDC No. 2:92-CR-469-7
                  ______________________________

Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
      Marlo Helmstetter, federal prisoner # 23245-034, appeals the denial
of his motion for compassionate release, filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), and the denial of his motion for reconsideration.
Helmstetter, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for conspiring to
possess cocaine with intent to distribute and two counts of committing

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30384        Document: 43-1       Page: 2     Date Filed: 03/15/2024

murder in aid of racketeering activity and to 240 months for aggravated
assault in aid of racketeering activity, asserts that the district court failed to
afford adequate consideration and weight to his arguments that his post-
sentencing rehabilitation, the length of time he has already served, and his
youth at the time of the offenses of conviction warranted § 3582(c)(1)(A)
relief. We review each denial for abuse of discretion. See United States v.
Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020); Kapordelis v. Myers, 16 F.4th
1195, 1202 (5th Cir. 2021).
       The district court considered Helmstetter’s arguments relating to his
rehabilitation and his youth at the time that he committed his criminal
offenses; nevertheless, the court determined that Helmstetter’s sentences as
imposed were appropriate to protect the public from his future crimes, reflect
the seriousness of his offenses, promote respect for the law, and deter future
similar conduct. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(A)-(C). In other words,
the district court’s “written order adequately reflects that it gave due
consideration to [Helmstetter’s] arguments in favor of a reduction of his
sentence” under the § 3553(a) factors. United States v. Batiste, 980 F.3d 466,
478-79 (5th Cir. 2020). Helmstetter’s extensive disagreement with the
district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors does not establish that the
court abused its discretion. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694; Kapordelis, 16
F.4th at 1202. In light of the district court’s reliance on the § 3553(a) factors
as the basis for denying relief, it was not required to determine whether
Helmstetter had cited extraordinary and compelling reasons for
compassionate release. See Ward v. United States, 11 F.4th 354, 360-62 (5th
Cir. 2021).
       AFFIRMED.