Court Opinion

ID: 9954809
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-27 00:00:32.617545+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:15:03.329610
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10620           Document: 55-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/26/2024

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                                  ____________
                                                                            United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                     Fifth Circuit
                                   No. 23-10620
                                 Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                 ____________                                March 26, 2024
                                                                              Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Kevin Shed,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 4:03-CR-316-1
                  ______________________________

Before Barksdale, Graves, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
      Kevin Shed, federal prisoner # 15155-045, contests the denial of his
sentence-reduction motion under section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018,
Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222 (2018). (To the extent he
may seek compassionate release, any such claim fails on numerous bases.)

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10620         Document: 55-1      Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/26/2024

                                 No. 23-10620

       The parties did not dispute, and the district court accepted, that Shed
was eligible for a reduction; but the court exercised its discretion to deny the
motion. See, e.g., United States v. Batiste, 980 F.3d 466, 471 (5th Cir. 2020)
(“[T]he decision whether to wield the resentencing authority granted by the
First Step Act is one committed to the court’s discretion”.). Review of the
court’s denial of a sentence reduction under the First Step Act is for abuse of
discretion. E.g., id. at 469.
       In the light of the record and the district court’s reasoning, including
its consideration of Shed’s offense as well as his accomplishments and good
record while in custody, his contentions on appeal do not demonstrate an
abuse of discretion. See, e.g., Concepcion v. United States, 597 U.S. 481, 501–
02 (2022) (explaining district court is not required to reduce sentence but
must demonstrate it considered contentions); Batiste, 980 F.3d at 478
(concluding no abused discretion when court “evaluated all pertinent factors
[and] simply exercised its statutory discretion to deny the motion”).
       AFFIRMED.

                                       2