Opinion
3:13-cr-01076-BEN
06-14-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. NARADA TURAIL CADE, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND COMPASSIONATE RELEASE [ECF Nos. 69, 71, 73, 77, 78, and 79]
Roger T. Benitez United States District Judge
Pro se, Movant Narada Turail Cade filed Motions for Appointment of Counsel and Compassionate Release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) ("Section 3582(c)(1)(A)"). ECF Nos. 69, 71, 73, 77, 78, and 79. T he Motions were referred to Federal Defenders pursuant to General Order 692-B. ECF No. 74. On May 27, 2021, Federal Defenders filed a Status Report and did not request appointment on Movant's behalf. See ECF No. 86.
At this time, the Court recognizes there is no applicable policy statement governing compassionate release motions filed by defendants under the recent amendments to Section 3582(c)(1)(A). The Court also recognizes that a district court's discretion may be informed by U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13, but that it is not binding, and a district court may consider any extraordinary and compelling reason for release that a defendant might raise. United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 801-02 (9th Cir. 2021).
While Movant argues he has served almost 90 months of his 135-month sentence, he does not articulate any extraordinary or compelling reasons justifying compassionate release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Examining the pleadings, the Court concludes no extraordinary or compelling factors are present here. Moreover, Movant was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) and (b), Sex Trafficking of Children. See ECF No. 35. His early release would pose a danger to the community. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(C). Accordingly, the motions are DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.