Filed: Nov. 20, 2020
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2020
Case: 20-60659 Document: 00515646772 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/20/2020
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 20-60659 November 20, 2020
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Marvin Rocedrek Brown,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:15-CR-28-1
Before King, Smith, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Marvin Rocedrek Brown, federal prisoner # 17998-043, pleaded guilty
in 2016 to conspiracy to commit money laundering, and the district court
sentenced him to 240 months of imprisonment and a three-year term of
supervised release. Brown is currently serving his sentence at the Oakdale
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-60659 Document: 00515646772 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/20/2020
No. 20-60659
facility and recently sought compassionate release based upon the COVID-
19 pandemic and his underlying medical condition of diabetes. The district
court denied his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion to reduce his sentence,
and Brown now appeals.
Brown asserts that the district court abused its discretion when it
denied his motion for compassionate release because it gave undue weight to
the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors as they existed at the time the
district court sentenced him, rather than as they existed at the time he filed
his motion for compassionate release. Additionally, he contends that the
district court afforded insufficient weight to significant factors, such as the
deficient response by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to the pandemic and the
risk that Brown faces as a diabetic during the pandemic.
We review a district court’s denial of a motion for a sentence
reduction under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) for an abuse of discretion. United States
v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). In conducting our review,
we give deference to the district court’s application of the § 3553(a)
sentencing factors.
Id. A district court abuses its discretion when “it bases
its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the
evidence.”
Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Here, Brown’s arguments do not establish that the district court based
its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the
evidence when it determined that the § 3553(a) factors weighed against a
compassionate release sentence reduction. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693–
94. Brown’s mere disagreement with how the district court balanced the
§ 3553(a) factors is insufficient to establish an abuse of discretion and “is not
a sufficient ground for reversal.”
Id. at 694. It is evident from the district
court’s decision, which noted the discretionary nature of the relief requested
and acknowledged Brown’s medical issues and the number of Oakdale
2
Case: 20-60659 Document: 00515646772 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/20/2020
No. 20-60659
inmates who have died from COVID-19, that it considered Brown’s
arguments in support of his request for release. The district court simply
determined that the balance of the § 3553(a) factors did not favor a
compassionate release reduction in his sentence. It was not unreasonable for
the district court to afford greater weight to Brown’s history and
characteristics, the amount of time served on his sentence, and the need to
protect the public from further crimes by Brown than the weight it placed
upon his medical issues, the impact of the pandemic at Oakdale, and the
BOP’s response to the pandemic. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693–94;
§ 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(C); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(2), p.s.
AFFIRMED.
3
