Opinion
3:09-cr-00365-BTM
11-22-2021
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COMPASSIONATE RELEASE
[ECF No. 374]
HONORABLE BARRY TED MOSKOWITZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Defendant Travis Chelberg has filed a motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). (ECF No. 374 (“Mot.”).)
As amended by the First Step Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) provides that:
[T]he court, upon motion of the Bureau of Prisons, or upon motion of the defendant after the defendant has fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure of the Bureau of Prisons to bring a motion on the defendant's behalf or the lapse of 30 days from the receipt of such a request by the warden of the defendant's facility, whichever is earlier, may reduce the term of imprisonment . . . after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a) to the extent that they are applicable, if it finds that -
(i) extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction ...
and that such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.1 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
First, Defendant has provided no evidence that he has exhausted his administrative remedies. See United States v. Wholecheese, 845 Fed.Appx. 655, 656 (9th Cir. 2021) (“the district court lacked authority to address [defendant's compassionate release] motion” because “[t]he record show[ed] that [defendant] did not fulfill [the administrative exhaustion] requirement prior to filing his compassionate release motion in the district court”).
Second, Defendant does not articulate, nor provide evidence of extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting a reduction in his sentence. Defendant only states in a conclusory fashion that he “is at risk of catching COVID-19, has serious medical issues, and should not be subject to the harsh living conditions of prison” and argues that his sentence was excessive. (Mot. at 2, 6-7.)
Defendant's motion for release under § 3582(c) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 2