Opinion
97 Cr. 817-13 (DC)
11-28-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GUILLERMO NEGRON, SR., Defendant.
GUILLERMO NEGRON, SR., pro se Register No. 40885-054 Federal Correctional Institution Schuylkill
GUILLERMO NEGRON, SR., pro se Register No. 40885-054 Federal Correctional Institution Schuylkill
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
DENNY CHIN, United States Circuit Judge
On November 15, 2022, defendant Guillermo Negron, Sr., filed pro se a "renew[ed]" motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), commonly called the "compassionate release" statute. Dkt. No. 632. As the title Negron gave his motion indicates, this is not his first motion for a sentence reduction. My assessment of Negron's case has not changed since I denied his previous motions, and for the reasons set forth below, this motion is denied as well.
The underlying facts and procedural history of Negron's case, as well as the applicable law, are set out in my memorandum decision of July 14, 2021, denying a motion for compassionate release that Negron filed pro se on December 14, 2020. See Dkt. No. 616. Negron then filed pro se a motion for reconsideration on February 22, 2022, which I denied on March 24, 2022. See Dkt. Nos. 624, 625. Negron subsequently petitioned the Court for assistance in securing his medical records. See Dkt. No. 627. I ordered the Government to respond, and by letter dated September 23, 2022, the Government stated it had obtained Negron's records and would mail them to him that day. See Dkt. No. 629. Negron then submitted a letter withdrawing any outstanding motions for compassionate release, to which I could give no effect because no motions were pending. See Dkt. Nos. 630, 631.
Negron's present motion followed. As in his earlier motions, Negron argues there are extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting a reduction in his sentence. Specifically, Negron points to (1) a series of medical conditions that place him at elevated risk of illness from CO VID-19, (2) the harsher conditions of confinement that he has experienced during the pandemic, and (3) the disparity between the life sentence I imposed on him and the sentence he believes he would receive if sentenced today. Dkt. No. 632, at 5-8.
When I considered Negron's previous motion for compassionate release, I concluded that at least some of these factors constituted extraordinary and compelling circumstances warranting a sentence reduction. See Dkt. No. 616, at 6-8. My assessment has not changed.
What has also not changed, however, is my assessment of the applicable factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Negron's crimes were extremely serious, with the evidence showing that he "played a senior role in the managerial chain" of a drug distribution organization, that he recruited his son into the enterprise, and that Negron was himself "responsible for in excess of 30 kilos of heroin." Dkt. No. 616, at 8-9. He allowed the organization to keep drugs and money at his residence and had access to weapons the organization kept in other apartments. At the time of his conviction Negron had a substantial criminal history, with 18 prior convictions. Id. at 9.
Negron's present motion does not warrant a different analysis of the section 3553(a) factors. Negron alludes to his "rehabilitation," "non-violent nature," and relationship with his daughter and grandson, but other than attaching a list of educational courses he has taken in prison - a list that stops in 2018 -- he does not provide evidence of his claims. Moreover, for the reasons I articulated at sentencing and in denying Negron's previous motions, I remain convinced that life is an "appropriate and just sentence considering the gravity" of his crimes. Dkt. No. 616, at 9.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, Negron's motion for a sentence reduction is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.