Opinion
1:18-cr-00064 WBS
12-10-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALTERICK PRAYLOW, Defendant.
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The court previously denied, for lack of jurisdiction, defendant's motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), noting that defendant's direct appeal of his conviction was still pending. (Docket Nos. 64, 75.) The Ninth Circuit then dismissed the direct appeal and denied defendant's motion for reconsideration and reconsideration en banc. (Docket Nos. 76, 78.) Defendant has now filed a Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for Compassionate Release (Docket No. 80), which the court construes as a new motion for compassionate release relying on the arguments in both the Supplemental Brief and defendant's prior motion and reply. Because the court already has briefing in opposition from the government, the court will decide the instant motion without further briefing from the parties.
The court recognizes defendant's contention that compassionate release is warranted because of the COVID-19 pandemic, conditions at FCI Sheridan, where defendant is housed, and defendant's various medical issues, including heart conditions, hypertension, obesity, seizures, mental health issues, and recent diagnosis of COVID-19. However, while these conditions may put him at greater risk of complications due to COVID-19, this risk is greatly diminished by the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, which by this point have almost certainly been offered to defendant. The court is also not persuaded that defendant's purported inability to provide self-care in prison, either alone or in combination with the COVID-19 pandemic, constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons for release under § 3582(c)(1)(A).
The court recognizes that § 1B1.13 is not binding on this court, though it “may inform a district court's discretion for § 3582(C)(1)(A) motions filed by a defendant.” United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2021). Accordingly, the court considers the Sentencing Commission's policy statements in ruling upon the instant motion. Nevertheless, defendant has not persuaded the court that his medical conditions along with the COVID-19 pandemic constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons for his release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 in this case.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant's motion for compassionate release (Docket No. 80), be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.