Opinion
6:19-CR-06197 EAW
2022-06-06
UNITED STATES of America, v. James T. STEPHENS, Defendant.
Cassie M. Kocher, Government Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Rochester, NY, for United States of America.
Cassie M. Kocher, Government Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Rochester, NY, for United States of America.
DECISION AND ORDER
ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD, Chief Judge
Defendant James T. Stephens (hereinafter "Defendant") has filed a motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). (Dkt. 41). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
Pursuant to the terms and conditions of a plea agreement, on January 10, 2020, Defendant waived indictment and pleaded guilty to a two-count information charging possession of fentanyl with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C), and being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). (Dkt. 23; Dkt. 24; Dkt. 25; Dkt. 26). According to the Presentence Investigation Report ("PSR"), investigators obtained a search warrant for Defendant's residence following multiple controlled purchases of cocaine, heroin, and fentanyl from the residence in April and June 2019. (Dkt. 29 at ¶¶ 25-29). Upon searching the residence, officers seized two loaded firearms, cocaine, fentanyl, and narcotics packaging paraphernalia. (Id. at ¶¶ 29-30). Defendant is 23 years old, and according to the PSR, he has one prior felony conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and Defendant committed the instant offense while on parole for his weapons conviction. (Id. at ¶¶ 66, 68). On April 20, 2020, the undersigned sentenced Defendant to 80 months in prison with three years of supervised release to follow. (Dkt. 33; Dkt. 35).
Defendant is currently housed within the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") at McKean (Medium) Federal Correctional Institution ("FCI McKean") with a scheduled release date of December 24, 2025. See Find an Inmate , Fed. Bureau of Prisons, https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/ (last visited May 31, 2022). According to the BOP's website tracking COVID-19 cases in its facilities, no inmates or staff at FCI McKean are currently testing positive for COVID-19. See COVID-19: Coronavirus , Fed. Bureau of Prisons, https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/ (last visited May 31, 2022).
Defendant asks that the Court reduce his sentence, followed by a term in a halfway house, home confinement, and a term of supervised release. (Dkt. 41 at 1). Defendant contracted COVID-19 on November 18, 2021, and in March 2022, he was diagnosed with idiopathic thrombocytopenia, which caused him to experience internal bleeding and low platelet levels, for which he received emergency treatment at an outside hospital. (Id. ). Documents attached to his motion also indicate he has suffered from asthma since he was a child. (Id. at 6). Defendant states that there are "hazardous conditions" at FCI McKean and that he does not have access to mental health services. (Id. at 1). Defendant contends that his condition, coupled with the "extreme lockdown conditions, deprivation of mental health and other support services," constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying release. (Id. ). The government opposes Defendant's motion, arguing that he has neither established extraordinary and compelling circumstances nor that the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) justify his release. (Dkt. 43 at 5). Among other things, the government cites to Defendant's prior COVID-19 infection, and his refusal of the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen or the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine when they were offered to him. (Id. ).
In response to the government's filing, Defendant acknowledges that he refused the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen COVID-19 vaccine because "numerous" inmates and community members have experienced blood clots after receiving it and it was only approved for emergency use, and he further argues that "none of the vaccines were ever passed by the FDA" and are ineffective against the delta and omicron variants of the virus causing COVID-19. (Dkt. 44).
Given Defendant's March 2022 idiopathic thrombocytopenia diagnosis, the Court understands his concerns about the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), there is a "plausible causal relationship" between that vaccine and "a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets (thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, or TTS)." See Ctrs. for Disease Control and Prevention, Johnson & Johnson's Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine: Overview and Safety, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/index.html (last visited May 31, 2022). However, Defendant offers no support for his contention that alternate vaccines are not effective against the delta and omicron variants, and in fact, the CDC advises that "vaccines reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19," and "people who are up to date on vaccines, including booster doses when eligible are likely to have stronger protection against COVID-19 variants, including Omicron." See Ctrs. for Disease Control & Prevention, What You Need to Know About Variants, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/variant.html (last visited May 31, 2022).
In addition to the submissions from the parties, the Court received a memorandum from the United States Probation Office ("USPO") dated May 26, 2022. (Dkt. 45). According to the USPO, as of that date, FCI McKean had no inmates or staff testing positive for the COVID-19 virus. (Id. at 1). Defendant is classified as a "Medical Care Level 1," meaning that he has limited medical needs that can be easily managed by clinician evaluations every 6 to 12 months. (Id. at 2).
II. LEGAL STANDARD AND ANALYSIS
"A court may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except pursuant to statute." United States v. Gotti , 433 F. Supp. 3d 613, 614 (S.D.N.Y. 2020). The compassionate release statute, as amended by the First Step Act, is such a statutory exception, and provides as follows:
The court may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except that ... the court, upon motion of the Director of the [BOP] ..., or upon motion of the defendant after the defendant has fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure of the [BOP] ... 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 (and may impose a term of probation or supervised release with or without conditions that
does not exceed the unserved portion of the original term of imprisonment), after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a) to the extent that they are applicable, if it finds that ... extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction ... and that such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission[.]
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Relief is appropriate pursuant to § 3582(c)(1)(A) when the following conditions are met: (1) the exhaustion requirement of the statute is satisfied; (2) extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant a reduction of the prison sentence; and (3) the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) support modification of the prison term. "The defendant carries the burden of showing that he or she is entitled to a sentence reduction under the statute." United States v. Roney , No. 10-CR-130S, 2020 WL 2846946, at *2 (W.D.N.Y. June 2, 2020), aff'd , 833 F. App'x 850 (2d Cir. 2020).
Although the statute references the Sentencing Commission's policy statements, the Second Circuit has held that U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 Application Note 1(D) does not apply to compassionate release motions brought directly to the court, and therefore a court is not constrained by the Sentencing Guideline's policy statements as to what constitutes "extraordinary and compelling." United States v. Brooker , 976 F.3d 228, 236 (2d Cir. 2020).
Defendant has fully exhausted his administrative remedies (Dkt. 41 at 6-7) and the government agrees (Dkt. 43 at 2). Thus, the exhaustion requirement does not bar the relief sought by Defendant.
However, the Court concludes that Defendant has failed to establish extraordinary and compelling reasons, and further that the § 3553(a) factors do not support the relief sought by Defendant.
Although the government argues that Defendant's health concerns "are not so extraordinary and compelling as to justify early release" (Dkt. 43 at 6), the Court concludes that on the present record Defendant has established that his existing medical conditions present a risk factor for severe illness or death from COVID-19. However, given that FCI McKean appears to have the virus under control, with no inmates of staff currently suffering from COVID-19, and the additional fact that Defendant has refused to be vaccinated against this virus, offering no sound reason for said refusal of at least the Moderna vaccine, the Court concludes that Defendant has failed to meet the standard of establishing extraordinary and compelling reasons. Indeed, releasing Defendant from prison would not insulate him from exposure to the virus causing COVID-19, and the rate of infection appears higher in the Rochester community than it is at FCI McKean. See Ctrs. for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID Data Tracker, https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/ (last visited May 31, 2022) (noting that, as of May 31, 2022, Monroe County was at a high level of community transmission, as defined by the CDC, of the virus that causes COVID-19).
In addition, given the underlying nature of Defendant's conviction, coupled with his criminal history, the Court continues to believe that the 80-month prison sentence was reasonable and appropriate. As explained in the PSR, Defendant was involved in the ongoing distribution of multiple dangerous illegal substances, including fentanyl. When law enforcement searched his residence in June 2019 they seized two loaded firearms, despite the fact that it was illegal for Defendant to possess them. These events occurred while Defendant was on parole for a state felony offense. Defendant states that he has demonstrated good behavior in prison and has taken advantage of the programming and services offered to him (see Dkt. 41 at 1), and the Court commends him for doing so. These actions may place him in a better position at the time he is released back into society, but they do not justify his early release. Under the circumstances, the § 3553(a) factors do not warrant a sentence reduction. As a result, granting compassionate release would not be consistent with the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and it would seriously undermine the fairness and purpose of the original sentence.
III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) (Dkt. 41) is denied.
SO ORDERED.