Court Opinion

ID: 9947084
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-02 01:00:37.721729+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:46.941978
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50497            Document: 66-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/01/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 23-50497
                                  Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                  ____________                                  March 1, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Paul Santivanez,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 5:98-CR-304-2
                   ______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Paul Santivanez appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for
compassionate release, filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). In his
motion, Santivanez argued, inter alia, that his life sentence on account of his
arson conviction was unconstitutional insofar as it violated the Ex Post Facto
Clause and that the unconstitutional life sentence constituted an

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50497       Document: 66-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/01/2024

                                 No. 23-50497

extraordinary and compelling reason that warranted a reduction in his
sentence. While his motion was pending, we held that “a prisoner cannot
use § 3582(c) to challenge the legality or the duration of his sentence.”
United States v. Escajeda, 58 F.4th 184, 187 (5th Cir. 2023). Based on our
holding in Escajeda, the district court denied Santivanez’s compassionate
release motion, finding that he had failed to demonstrate an extraordinary
and compelling reason for a sentence reduction.
       On appeal, Santivanez has filed a letter brief and an unopposed motion
for summary disposition. He concedes that his argument on appeal—“that
his unconstitutional life sentence is an extraordinary and compelling reason
that makes him eligible for a reduced sentence under § 3582(c)(1)(A)”—is
foreclosed by Escajeda, but seeks to preserve his challenge for further review.
       Where “there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the
case,” summary disposition is appropriate. Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis,
406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the motion for summary
disposition is GRANTED, and the district court’s order is AFFIRMED.

                                      2