The Tom Norrid Law Firm
SAMARITAN PROJECTS LLC
4415 Gladstone Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64123-1238
417-236-1179
The SAMARITAN-PROJECTS prepares post-conviction motions along with appeals under the direction of Attorney Tom Norrid and specializes in the preparation of compassionate release and 2255 motions. The Projects newsletter reports every winning published district court and court of appeals case for the week in review. Contacts: Rusty – 417 901 3000 – Eddie 417 818 1938.
Our website – SAMARITANPROJECTS.COM – is available to your family and friends. Our Newsletters and Alerts are published on the WEBSITE.
TELL ALL YOUR FRIENDS TO ADD US TO THEIR CORRLINKS SO THEY CAN RECEIVE OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER AND ALERTS.attorneytnorridnews@gmail.com
CR.RIS/DISPARITY. The Southern District of New York granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Anthony Patterson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215375 (S.D. N.Y. Nov. 21, 2024).Defendant is 54-years old and has served 18-years of his 25-year sentence. Following a jury trial, Patterson was convicted of participating in a conspiracy to distribute 1,000 kilograms and more of substances containing a detectable amount of marijuana in violation of 18 USC 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A) ("Count One"), and possessing firearms in furtherance of that conspiracy in violation of 18 USC 924(c) ("Count Two"). The sentence imposed on Patterson was the mandatory minimum of 300 months. Both parties agreed that an intervening change in the law has produced a disparity between Patterson's current sentence and the applicable mandatory minimum if he were sentenced today. While in prison the defendant has completed multiple educational courses, provided sanitation services to correctional staff's private areas and offices, and has an exemplary disciplinary record. The court agreed with the Government's assessment that these "efforts are commendable."The Sentencing Commission's study on "The Effects of Aging on Recidivism Among Federal Offenders" supports defendant's release. Patterson is currently 54-years old, and defendants in their fifties have lower recidivism rates than younger defendants. Also significant is the fact that defendant is subject to removal from the United States. At the time of his sentencing, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") lodged a detainer against defendant, a Jamaican citizen.Defendant’s sentence was reduced to time served, and he is to be released solely to ICE custody in order to initiate his removal proceedings to Jamaica.
CR.RIS/REHABILITATION/DISPARITY/USSG 1B1.13(b)(5). The District of Maryland granted in part a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Antonio Holton, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214698 (D. Md. Nov. 25, 2024). Holton was found guilty of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 USC 922(g)(1). On Dec. 14, 2010, Holton was sentenced to 288 months imprisonment. Holton cited to disparities in sentencing, both in terms of his current sentence in relation to the sentence he would receive now after a change in law, and in terms of his current sentence in relation to the sentences of other defendants. Holton asserted his risk of sustaining COVID-19 complications caused by underlying medical conditions. More generally, Holton supported his request by citing his post-sentencing rehabilitative efforts, the length of his sentence, the amount of time served, his age at the time of the offense, and his lack of danger to others.This court and others have found that, where the length of a defendant's sentence is significantly longer than the national or the relevant Circuit average sentence for similar (or more serious) crimes, such disparity can constitute an extraordinary and compelling reason justifying a sentence reduction consistent with 1B1.13(b)(5). The court found that the disparity in Holton's sentence in comparison with other defendants nationally constitutes an extraordinary and compelling reason justifying a reduction in his sentence, especially considering Holton's admirable rehabilitative efforts since his incarceration. Holton has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to bettering himself while incarcerated, taking advantage of numerous educational and rehabilitative courses, and consistently holding a job, where he received positive evaluations. During his long imprisonment, Holton has impressively received just a single disciplinary infraction which the Government notes "is a point in his favor." There is an unwarranted disparity between Holton's sentence and sentences imposed upon comparable defendants. Accordingly, the court found that, while the relevant 3553(a) factors do not support Holton's immediate release, they do support a reduction in his sentence. Holton's sentence wasreduced from 288 months to 240 months of incarceration.
CR.RIS/DISPARITY/REHABILITATION. The District of Kansas granted in part a CR.RIS motion in United States v.Vicencio Olea-Monarez, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214010 (D. Kan. Nov. 25, 2024). On Oct. 22, 2014, defendant and nine co-defendants were charged in a Superseding Indictment with criminal offenses including conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of methamphetamine (Count 1), conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 marijuana plants (Count 2), distribution and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine (Counts 3, 5-9, 12, 15, 18-19, 21, 23-24), possession with intent to distribute cocaine (Count 27), maintaining a residence for the purpose of storing, using and distributing methamphetamine and cocaine (Counts 22, 26, 29), and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime (Counts 25, 28). On Nov. 2, 2016, the court imposed a sentence of life, plus a consecutive sentence of 5 years on the first firearms conviction (Count 25) and a consecutive sentence of 25 years on the second firearms conviction (Count 28), for a controlling sentence of life plus a consecutive 30 years. Olea-Monarez acknowledged that although he is a permanent resident of the United States, his offenses of conviction will likely result in his deportation if he is released. Olea-Monarez argued that the First Step Act amendment represents a dramatic change in the sentencing of subsequent 924(c) convictions that constitutes an extraordinary and compelling reason for this court to grant Olea-Monarez's motion, in part, and reduce his sentence on Count 28 from 25 years to five years consecutive to all other counts. Olea-Monarez received a 30-year consecutive sentence on these two 924(c) convictions, instead of the 10-year consecutive sentence he would have received if the First Step Act amendment was retroactively applicable to him. Given the change in the law and the 20-year difference a retroactive application of the amended law would make, the Court concluded this is an extraordinary and compelling reason to grant Olea-Monarez a reduction in sentence. Monarez's argued he should also receive a reduction to his life sentence on the drug counts under Section (b)(6), though the Court considered whether he should receive a reduction to his sentence on the drug-related counts based on the three-part test for motions for compassionate release, including the "other reasons" category at Section (b)(5). Records show Olea-Monarez's laudable rehabilitative efforts. He has taken classes in English, enrolled in classes to obtain his GED and driver's license, and completed classes on health and substance abuse. He has had only two disciplinary infractions: one in 2017 for fighting and one in 2018 for being absent from assignment. The Court granted defendant's motion for compassionate release in part-reducing his sentence on Count 28 from 25 years to 5 years consecutive to all other counts. Thus, Olea-Monarez's overall sentence was reduced from Life plus 30 years consecutive to Life plus 10 years consecutive.
CR/RIS/MEDICAL. The Middle District of Florida granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Ronald Trucchio, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212632 (M.D, Fla. Nov. 22, 2024). Trucchio requested a reduction in his life sentence to time served. The defendant filed medical records; letters from prison staff, friends and family; progress reports and continuing education records; and other documents in support. On March 5, 2007, defendant was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment following a guilty trial verdict to charges of RICO conspiracy based on conduct that ended on June 29, 2005. Now 73-years old. Defendantsubmits that his serious and debilitating medical conditions, his age, the number of years he has served, his extraordinary rehabilitation, the continuing threat of COVID-19, the conditions of his confinement endured during the entirety of the pandemic, his clean disciplinary record, his service to the BOP facilities in which he has been incarcerated, and the letters of support demonstrating his character and that he would be a law-abiding citizen if released all combine to support a reduction in his sentence. In July 2024, he suffered an ischemic stroke. His motion outlines the following medical conditions from which he suffers: chronic, severe COPD with significant airway obstruction and dyspnea; spinal stenosis, spinal muscular atrophy and chronic back pain; acute osteoarthritis of his shoulders and extremities; degenerative joint disease, including a total left hip replacement and six other orthopedic surgeries; hyperlipidemia, high Caratine levels (indicative of liver disease) and chronic anemia; legal blindness for the past two to three years; high blood pressure (hypertension) that is only partially controlled through medication; largely wheelchair bound/limited physical movement; an enlarged prostate and a weakened bladder. Defendant was a long-standing member of the Gambino Crime Family Captain which he has never repudiated. The Government cited to the indictment by which defendant, and others, were charged under RICO with conducting the affairs of a criminal enterprise which included murder, robbery, extortion, and drug distribution. Defendant submitted his activities and efforts go well beyond simply following the rules, including the significance of his selection as a BOP "Suicide Watch Companion," a role that may only be filled by an inmate who is mature, responsible, and capable of dealing with an emergent and emotionally charged situation. The Court found Trucchio's age (73) constitutes an extraordinary and compelling circumstance warranting a reduction in sentence because he is older than 65 years, he is experiencing a serious deterioration in physical health because of the aging process, and he has served at least 10 years of his sentence. USSG 1B1.13(b)(2). The Court found that Trucchio's age, serious medical conditions, declining health, and term of incarceration, including throughout the entirety of the pandemic, combine to constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons to grant his request for compassionate release. Sentence reduced to time served.
CR.RIS/DISPARITY/USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). The Western District of Virginia granted in part a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Bobby Stewart, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212571 (W.D. Va. Nov. 21, 2024). On Aug. 1, 2013, Stewart and seven codefendants were charged with twenty-three counts related to distributing drugs. Stewart was charged with one count of conspiring to distribute 280 grams or more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base, or "crack," in violation of 21 USC 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846 (Count 1); and three counts of distributing a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of crack in violation of 21 USC841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Counts 18, 19, and 21). On Dec. 11, 2013, Stewart entered into an agreement in which he agreed to plead guilty to Count One of the indictment.Stewart was classified as a career offender. The court sentenced Stewart to a term of 180 months. Stewart sought compassionate release on the following: (1) If sentenced today he no longer would be considered a career offender and he would face a much shorter sentencing guidelines range, and the difference in the sentence he received in 2014 and the sentence he would receive today is a gross disparity warranting compassionate release; (2) he has a chronic medical condition that puts him at a particularized risk of contracting a deadly virus should he be exposed to one; (3) staffing shortages at the Bureau of Prisons which result in every-other-day lockdowns impede him from getting proper medical care, participating in rehabilitative programming, and having contact with his family; and (4) he has made great strides toward rehabilitation. The Government argued the Commission exceeded its authority when it promulgated USSG 1B1.13(b)(6) and (c). Congress gave the Commission the authority to promulgate the policy statement at 28 USC 994(t) and the Commission did so. Congress presumably reviewed 1B1.13(b)(6) and (c) during the 180-day period the revised guidelines were under review and took no action. The court found that 1B1.13(b)(6) and (c) of the guidelines are consistent with 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A) and 28 USC 994(t). The court found the 50-month disparity between Stewart's current sentence and the sentence he would likely be given for the same conduct today, is a "gross disparity" that constitutes an "extraordinary and compelling" reason warranting a sentence reduction under 3582(c)(1)(A). The court grantedStewart's motion for compassionate release and reduced his sentence to 130 months.
CR.RIS/DISPARITY/REHABILITATION/USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). The Southern District of New York granted in part a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Jaime Chavez, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213244 (S.D. N.Y. Nov. 21, 2022). In Jan. 2005, a jury convicted Chavez of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine in violation of 21 USC 846 ("Count 1") and of possession, in furtherance of the predicate cocaine trafficking conspiracy, of a firearm equipped with a silencer in violation of 18 USC 924(c)(1)(A) and (c)(1)(B)(ii) ("Count 2"). The mandatory minimum sentence applicable to Chavez pertaining to Count 1 was 240 months, and the mandatory minimum sentence for Count 2 was 360 months. Each sentence had to be served consecutively. Chavez was sentenced to a total of 660 months imprisonment. Chavez arguedthe court should reduce the term of his sentence of imprisonment because certain non-retroactive changes in the law have produced a "gross disparity" between his current sentence and what his sentence would be if he were sentenced today. Citing USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). Chavez contends this disparity constitutes an "extraordinary and compelling" reason to reduce his sentence under 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A). Chavez argued his 25-year sentence on Count 1 constitutes an "unusually long sentence" under section 1B1.13(b)(6). The Court agreed. Congress amended the statute to change the predicate offense necessary to trigger the enhanced penalties of 21 USC 841(b)(1)(A) from any "felony drug offense" to only "serious drug felonies." The statute defines "serious drug felonies" as "an offense under the Controlled Substances Act . . . for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law." 18 USC 924(e)(2). Chavez's previous conviction under California law would no longer trigger enhanced penalties if he were sentenced today because the maximum penalty for that conviction is less than ten years. Chavez successfully completed the Bureau of Prison's Non-Residential Drug Abuse Program, acquired his GED, and has disassociated from the criminal gang he was involved in through the BOP's Gang Disassociation Program. Considering the above changes in the law resulting in a gross disparity in Chavez's unusually long sentences, the court found that Chavez has demonstrated extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying a sentence reduction. The Court concluded that a sentence reduction was warranted and shortened Chavez's sentence to 480 months.
CR.RIS/MEDICAL, The District of Idaho granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Laura Russell, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213380 (D. Idaho Nov. 21, 2024). On June 15, 2021, a grand jury indicted Russell—along with three co-conspirators—on charges of distributing drugs and laundering money. Russell eventually pled guilty and the Court sentenced her to 40 months of incarceration. Russell claims her time at FCI Dublin was very difficult. She argued the medical treatment she received for her conditions was marginal at best and that treatment providers at FCI Dublin did not follow any of her primary care physicians' recommendations that would have effectively managed her conditions. She alleged that a guard purposefully and repeatedly slammed a cell door into her elbow resulting in significant damage. And then, when Russell complained of the event to FCI Dublin staff that same guard retaliated against her. On July 10, 2024, Russell filed the instant motion requesting she be released early based on her medical conditions (and the sub-par medical care she has received while incarcerated) and the overall conditions she endured at FCI Dublin. Russell has provided two supplements to the court indicating that, while she has received better medical treatment since arriving at FMC Lexington, she was recently hospitalized with "stroke-like symptoms," which medical staff believe are related to her Meniere's Disease. She notified the court that an MRI of her elbow shows she is now suffering from nerve damage (which could not have been seen on an x-ray) and ultimately may suffer forever from "ulnar neuritis, olecranon bursitis, and [] associated pain, swelling, numbness, and impairment of physical strength and dexterity."Russell claimed she was not provided any medication for her osteoporosis and that the medication she was on for hypothyroidism was actually over-prescribed (e.g. she was on the medication too long which resulted in complications).Russell's Meniere's disease appears to be deteriorating. Importantly, deterioration of a medical condition is the primary question under the health subsection of 1B1.13(B)(1)(C). The court granted Russell's Motion to Reduce Sentence and reducedher sentence to time served.
APPEAL/RESENTENCE. The Eleventh Circuit vacated and remanded for resentencing United States v. Aaron Green, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 29917 (11th Cir. Nov. 25, 2024). Greenappealed his conviction under 18 USC 922(g)(1) for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon and the 120-month sentence of imprisonment the district court imposed. He argued his conviction should be set aside because the district court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence of thefirearm that served as the basis for his felon-in-possession conviction. He contends that police obtained the firearm in a search that violated the Fourth Amendment. He also argued the district court erred when it granted the Government’s motion in limine, which prevented him from presenting a justification defense at trial. At his sentence, he argued the district court erred when it applied three enhancements under the Sentencing Guidelines that increased his offense level. After review, and with the benefit of oral argument the court affirmed Green’s conviction. But it concluded that the district court erred in applying two of the sentencing enhancements. The court therefore vacated his sentence and remanded to the district court for resentencing.
APPEAL/RESENTENCE, The Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded for resentencing United States v. Stephen Bullis, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30041 (4th Cir. Nov. 26, 2024). Stephen Bullis was convicted of six federal crimes, including two counts of using a firearm during and in relation to other crimes in violation of 18 USC 924(c). After serving 23 years in prison the Supreme Court struck down the “residual clause” of 18 USC924(c) as unconstitutional. This led the district court to set aside Bullis’s two 924(c) convictions and resentence him on the remaining four counts. Bullis argued the resentencing violated his rights under the Double Jeopardy Clause because he had fully served his sentence on these counts at the time of the resentencing. The Eastern District of North Carolina initially sentenced Bullis to 235 months of imprisonment on each of Counts 1, 2, 4, and 5, all to run concurrently. On Count 3, Bullis was sentenced to 360 months and on Count 6 he received a lifetime sentence both to run consecutively to the 235-month concurrent sentences. After the Supreme Court’s ruling, the district court vacated Counts 3 and 6 and resentenced Bullis to 450 months on Count 2 and 240 months on Counts 1, 3, and 5, all to run concurrently. The Fourth Circuit held that Bullis’s resentencing did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because his sentences for Counts 1, 2, 4, and 5 were part of a consecutive sentence package that had not been fully served. However, the court found that the district court committed reversible error by imposing a special condition of supervised release that differed materially from the court’s oral pronouncement and by failing to incorporate clearly the Standard Conditions of Supervision as adopted in the Eastern District of North Carolina. Consequently, the Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded the case for resentencing.
Comments