SAMARITAN NEWSLETTER – 04-21- 2025

Satellite Law Office of Tom Norrid

SAMARITAN PROJECTS LLC

4415 Gladstone Blvd.

Kansas City, MO 64123

The SAMARITAN-PROJECT prepares post-conviction and compassionate release motions under the direction of Attorney Tom Norrid. The Project retrieves documents at reasonable prices. The Project newsletter reports every winning published district court and court of appeals case for the week in review.

SAMARITAN PROJECT VICTORY. EDDIE COX AND RUSSELL MARKS HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS CASE SINCE THE EARLY 90’s. CR.RIS/MEDICAL. The District of New Jersey granted a CR.RIS motion in the case of United States v. Louis Anthony Manna, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72609 (D. N.J. Apr. 16, 2025). Manna is 95 years old and is indisputably frail and in failing health. He has been incarcerated for more than 36 years, serving an 80-year sentence. A medical summary issued by FMC Rochester in Sept. 2024 reveals forty separate diagnoses, including lung cancer, stroke, Parkinson's disease, chronic kidney disease, recurring MRSA, and hypertension. Manna's history of egregious criminal conduct, including his active and high-level involvement in organized crime, i.e., "La Cosa Nostra," and his personal commissions of crimes of violence, exploitation, and intimidation are notorious and were not in dispute. Manna’s multi-decades-long incarceration period—the last many years of which he has spent suffering and in declining health—undoubtedly promoted respect for the law and the severe consequences for convictions under RICO. Sentence was reduced to time served. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE RELEASED BOBBY MANY YEARS AGO.

CR.RIS/MEDICAL/REHABILITATION. The Southern District of California granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Rafael Lopez-Ontiveros, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71746 (S.D. Calif. Apr. 14, 2025). Lopez pled guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine in violation of 21 USC 841(a)(2), and he was sentenced to 168 months. Lopez has been diagnosed with anxiety, insomnia, hypertension, depression, prediabetes, and obesity. Lopez contended three extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant granting compassionate release: (1) changes in the law which have created a disparity between his sentence and those of similarly situated defendants; (2) his medical conditions, including prediabetes, obesity, dermatitis, anxiety, insomnia, hypertension, and high cholesterol; (3) the conditions of confinement he endured during the COVID-19 pandemic; and (4) his rehabilitation during incarceration. Lopez also contends that even if none of these circumstances constitute "extraordinary and compelling reasons" on their own, they constitute "extraordinary and compelling reasons" in the aggregate. USSG 1B1.13(b)(5)). Lopez has shown that a sentence reduction to time served would result in a sentence that is commensurate with his conduct and provides adequate deterrence. Lopez's rehabilitation is enough to overcome the seriousness of his offense, which occurred over a decade ago. Sentence reduced to time served.

CR.RIS/DISPARITY/REHABILITATION/1B1.13(b)(5). The Central District of Illinois granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Johnson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69778 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 11, 2025). Johnson was indicted on one count of conspiring to distribute 50 grams of cocaine base (crack cocaine) and 5 kilograms of powder cocaine in violation of 21 USC 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). The Government filed a notice under 21 USC 851 based on two prior Illinois state felony convictions. The defendant was sentenced to the mandatory minimum sentence of life imprisonment. Defendant sought compassionate release on the three following primary reasons: "(1) his diagnosis of 'polycythemia cancer; (2) the risk of COVID-19 in light of his high blood pressure, prediabetes, and obesity; and (3) non-retroactive provisions in the First Step Act of 2018 that eliminated the mandatory life sentence for his convictions." Johnson "recently completed the BOP's 500-hour Challenge Program" and "served as a Challenge Program mentor." Defendant asserted USSG 1B1.13(b)(6) provides a basis for relief and, alternatively, 1B1.13(b)(5) allows the Court to consider whether the totality of the circumstances warrants a reduced sentence. Three circumstances considered in combination with each other constitute an extraordinary and compelling reason to reduce Johnson's life sentence: (1) He would likely have received less than the mandatory life sentence imposed if he had been sentenced after United States v. Ruth, 966 F.3d 642 (7th Cir. 2020); (2) The sentencing disparity between him and other similarly situated defendants, and; (3) He has shown remarkable rehabilitation in prison. The totality of the unique circumstances considered in combination with one another as discussed constitute extraordinary compelling reasons to reduce Johnson's life sentence within the meaning of 3582(c)(1)(A) and 1B1.13(b)(5). Defendant’s sentence was reduced to 360 months.

CR.RIS/DISPARITY/REHABILITATION. The Middle District of North Carolina granted a CR.RIS motion in part in United States v. Gabriel Martin, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69378 (M.D. N.C. Apr. 11, 2025). Martin is serving a 24-year sentence for multiple robberies and firearm crimes, and he sought a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) based on a non-retroactive statutory change in the length of stacked sentences for 18 USC 924(c) offenses. Martin was 19 years old when he committed these offenses. His age is a mitigating factor in two ways: he was young at the time he committed the offenses, and he is now in his 30's, making him less likely to reoffend. Martin has an impressive record of rehabilitation. Defendant’s sentence reduced to 180 months.

APPEAL/2255/STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. The Sixth Circuit vacated and remanded Allen Walker v. United States, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8604 (6th Cir. Apr. 11, 2025). Walker filed a motion seeking habeas relief under 28 USC 2255. The Government opposed his motion but did not raise the statute of limitations as a defense. The district court denied the motion as untimely. Walker appealed and the court remanded so the district court could determine whether the Government’s failure to raise the statute of limitations defense amounted to forfeiture or waiver. The court cautioned the district court could not resurrect a waived limitations defense but could potentially consider a forfeited one. On remand, the district court decided that the Government forfeited the defense, considered it despite the forfeiture, and again denied Walker’s motion as time-barred. Walker appealed that forfeiture determination arguing that because the Government waived the statute of limitations defense the district court should not have considered it. The Sixth Circuit agreed. The court reversed and remanded so the district court could proceed to the merits of Walker’s 2255 motion.

APPEAL/PLEA AGREEMENT. The First Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Hector Maldonado-Maldonado, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8600 (1st Cir. Apr. 11, 2025). Maldonado-Maldonado was involved in an altercation at the Metropolitan Detention Center Guaynabo. During a routine lockdown the officer noticed Maldonado was not in his cell and found contraband (an extra pillow). When the officer removed the pillow, Maldonado returned, yelled profanities, and punched the officer. Maldonado and his cellmate, Miguel Santana-Avilés, then assaulted the officer causing bodily injuries. Maldonado was indicted and charged with assaulting a federal officer. He entered a plea agreement proposing a sentencing calculation resulting in a Total Offense Level of 13. The probation officer prepared a PSR with a different guidelines calculation, applying the "aggravated assault" guideline and recommending a TOL of 24. Maldonado objected to the PSR, arguing that the facts did not support the aggravated assault guideline. The Government’s sentencing memorandum and the prosecutor at the hearing advocated for a higher sentence, including a four-point enhancement for "serious bodily injury," which was not part of the plea agreement. The district court adopted the PSR’s calculation and sentenced Maldonado to 78 months in prison. The Government conceded it breached the plea agreement by advocating for a higher enhancement and not adhering to the agreed-upon sentencing range. The First Circuit agreed the breach was clear and obviously affecting Maldonado’s substantial rights and the fairness of the proceedings. The court vacated Maldonado’s sentence and remanded for resentencing before a different judge emphasizing the fault lay with the prosecutor, not the sentencing judge.

ILLINOIS PRIOR DRUG CONVICTIONS WHICH WERE UTILIZED TO INVOKE 21 USC 851 OR CAREER OFFENDER ENHANCEMENT CAN BE CHALLANGED IN A COMPASSIONATE RELEASE MOTION UNDER USSG 1B1.13(b)(5). United States v. Johnson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69778, at 20-21 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 11, 2025). To be clear, the law has not changed; Ruth "did not establish new law." United States v. King, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68958, 2024 WL 1639821, at 3 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 16, 2024). What has changed is that Ruth's interpretation of "the relevant statutory texts" now controls. White v. United States, 8 F.4th 547, 556 (7th Cir. 2021). Under that interpretation, if Johnson were sentenced today, he would not be subject to the same penalties under 21 USC 841, nor would he receive a statutory sentencing enhancement based on his Illinois cocaine convictions. His effective guideline range would thus be different. Although the impact of Ruth considered in isolation may not be sufficient to establish an extraordinary and compelling reason for release, on the facts of this case, it is a factor that weighs in favor of such a finding. See United States v. Brock, 39 F.4th 462, 465 (7th Cir. 2022).