Court Opinion

ID: 9958835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-10 00:00:34.402259+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:44.580623
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30419            Document: 50-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/09/2024

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

                                   ____________                               FILED
                                                                           April 9, 2024
                                    No. 23-30419
                                                                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                  Summary Calendar                            Clerk
                                  ____________

United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Steven Deem,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Louisiana
                            USDC No. 5:13-CR-149-1
                   ______________________________

Before King, Haynes, and Graves, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
       Steven Deem, federal prisoner # 16418-035, appeals the denial of his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release. The district
court denied relief based upon its consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors, and we review that denial for an abuse of discretion. See United States
v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020).

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30419        Document: 50-1        Page: 2    Date Filed: 04/09/2024

                                  No. 23-30419

       The arguments Deem makes challenging the validity of his prior state
conviction as a child-sex offender, the validity of his instant conviction for
distribution of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2), and the
use of his prior state conviction to enhance the statutory sentencing range in
this case under § 2252A(b)(1) are not the proper subject of a § 3582(c)(1)(A)
motion, see United States v. Escajeda, 58 F.4th 184, 187 (5th Cir. 2023), and
we do not consider them. Nor do we consider his arguments regarding
factors to be considered under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), which is inapplicable to
Deem’s motion for relief under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
       Citing his age, his poor health, and the fact that he would return to a
home with no children in it, Deem contends he is not likely to recidivate and
the district court thus erred in finding that he posed a potential danger to the
community if released. However, the district court explained its decision to
deny relief in terms of several of the § 3553(a) factors. Deem has failed to
show the district court abused its discretion in determining the § 3553(a)
factors did not warrant compassionate release. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at
693-94. His challenge to the district court’s balancing of the § 3553(a) factors
is not a sufficient ground for reversal. See id. at 694.
       Deem’s motions for a hearing and for the appointment of counsel are
DENIED, his motion to assign an intervenor to file record excerpts on his
behalf is DENIED as unnecessary, and the order of the district court is
AFFIRMED.

                                        2