United States v. Campbell

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALTEDIAS MAURICE CAMPBELL, Defendant.

No. 01-CR-2002-CJW-MAR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA EASTERN DIVISION

January 25, 2021

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion for compassionate release and for relief under Section 404 of the First Step Act ("FSA") filed on June 29, 2020. (Docs. 289 & 290). On July 6, 2020, the government timely filed a resistance. (Doc. 291). On July 13, 2020, defendant timely filed a reply. (Doc. 292). On October 23, 2020, defendant filed a supplement to his motion. (Doc. 293). For the following reasons, the Court denies defendant's motion.

The Court will first address whether compassionate release is warranted before considering relief under the FSA.

II. RELEVANT BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

On February 10, 2000, an officer observed defendant sell cocaine from his car to S.A. within 1,000 feet of an elementary school.¹ (Doc. 200, at 5). S.A. was arrested and, when asked who sold him the cocaine, identified "Gushie's brother." (Id.). One of the officers recognized Gushie as a nickname for defendant's brother. (Id.). Officerslocated defendant's car outside a nearby residence on Bratnober Street. (Id.). After checking the license plate on the vehicle, officers determined the vehicle was registered to defendant at a residence on Bratnober Street. (Id.). Shortly thereafter, defendant left his residence and drove away in his vehicle. (Id.). Officers stopped the vehicle and defendant consented to a search. (Id.). Officers did not recover any drugs, cash, or other contraband from the vehicle. (Id.). On September 26, 2000, officers stopped defendant's vehicle for failure to use a turn signal. (Id., at 6). Officers detected the odor of alcohol and subjected defendant to sobriety tests, which he failed. (Id.). Defendant was arrested after the breathalyzer showed his blood alcohol content was .255. (Id.). Upon searching defendant's vehicle, officers recovered two baggies of cocaine under the driver's seat. (Id.). A total of $174, consisting of $10 and $20 bills, was recovered from defendant's person. (Id.). In total, this offense involved two grams of cocaine. (Id.).

On January 12, 2001, a grand jury issued an Indictment charging defendant with one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C).² (Doc. 1); see also (Doc. 200, at 3). On February 1, 2001, defendant pled not guilty and was detained. (Doc. 3). On May 2, 2001, defendant was found guilty after a jury trial. (Docs. 51 & 55). On May 9, 2001, defendant moved for, among other things, a new trial. (Doc. 59). On July 27, 2001, the Court sentenced defendant. (Doc. 79).³ The Court found defendant did not qualify as a career offender because his prior burglary conviction was not a crime of violence. (Doc. 200, at 3). Thus, defendant was in criminal history category VI with a total offense level of 22, yielding an advisory guideline range of imprisonment of 84 to 105 months. (Id., at 3-4). The Court sentenced defendant to 104 months' imprisonment followed by four years on supervised release. (Doc. 80). That same day, the Courtdenied defendant's motion for a new trial. (Doc. 78). On August 2, 2001, defendant appealed his conviction and sentence to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Doc. 81).

On June 5, 2002, defendant again moved for a new trial, this time based on newly discovered evidence. (Doc. 90). After holding a hearing on defendant's motion on August 26, 2002 (Doc. 97), the Court granted the motion on December 23, 2002 (Doc. 99). On January 3, 2003, the government appealed the Court's grant of a new trial. (Doc. 100). On February 28, 2003, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the government's appeal. (Doc. 106).

On March 24, 2003, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded this case back to the district court for further proceedings. (Doc. 111).⁴ That same day, a grand jury issued a Superseding Indictment charging defendant with the same offense as well as distribution of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school in violation of Sections 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), and 860. (Doc. 108); see also (Doc. 200, at 4). On April 17, 2003, defendant pled not guilty and was detained. (Doc. 113). On June 6, 2003, defendant was found guilty of both counts charged in the Superseding Indictment after a five-day jury trial. (Docs. 167 & 173).

On December 23, 2003, the Court again sentenced defendant. (Doc. 211). Defendant was in criminal history category VI with a total offense level of 34 after receiving a career offender enhancement, yielding an advisory guideline range of 262 to 327 months imprisonment on both counts followed by effectively six years to life on supervised release on both counts. (Doc. 200, at 43-44). The Court sentenced defendant to 300 months' imprisonment on Count 1 and 240 months' imprisonment on Count 2 to be served concurrently and six years' supervised release on Count 1 and three years' supervised release on Count 2 to be served concurrently. (Doc. 212). On December 29,2003, defendant timely appealed his conviction and sentence. (Doc. 213). On July 28, 2005, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. (Doc. 226).

On February 20, 2008, defendant filed a pro se motion to reduce his sentence. (Doc. 231). On November 12, 2008, the Court found a reduction was not warranted. (Doc. 233). On December 17, 2008, defendant appealed the Court's ruling. (Doc. 235). On January 8, 2009, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal due to lack of jurisdiction. (Doc. 239). On February 23, 2009, defendant filed another pro se motion to reduce his sentence. (Doc. 241). On February 24, 2009, the Court denied defendant's motion. (Doc. 242). On March 23, 2009, defendant moved for the Court to reconsider its prior Order and moved for an evidentiary hearing. (Doc. 243). On March 24, 2009, the Court denied both motions. (Doc. 245). On April 14, 2009, defendant appealed the Court's ruling. (Doc. 248). On May 8, 2009, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. (Doc. 253).

On October 4, 2011, defendant filed a pro se motion to reduce his sentence. (Doc. 256). That same day, the Court denied the motion. (Doc. 257). On November 28, 2011, defendant appealed the Court's ruling. (Doc. 258). On December 7, 2011, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal as untimely. (Doc. 263). On January 25, 2013, defendant filed a pro se motion to set aside the Judgment. (Doc. 267). On January 28, 2013, the Court denied the motion. (Doc. 268). On February 11, 2013, defendant filed a pro se motion to correct his sentence. (Doc. 269). On February 12, 2013, the Court denied the motion. (Doc. 270). On August 19, 2013, defendant filed a pro se motion to be resentenced. (Doc. 273). On August 20, 2013, the Court denied the motion. (Doc. 274). On November 20, 2014, defendant filed a pro se motion to reduce his sentence. (Doc. 275). On June 19, 2015, the Court denied the motion. (Doc. 276).

On February 14, 2019, defendant filed a pro se motion to reduce his sentence. (Doc. 279). On April 6, 2020, defendant filed another pro se motion to reduce his sentence. (Doc. 280). On April 13, 2020, the Court denied defendant's second motion. (Doc. 281). On June 8, 2020, defendant filed a third pro se motion to reduce his sentence.(Doc. 284). On June 15, 2020, the Court appointed defendant counsel. (Doc. 285). On June 29, 2020, defendant filed his amended motion now before the Court. (Doc. 289). Defendant, now nearly 47 years old, is currently incarcerated at Fairton FCI with a projected release date of June 25, 2022.⁵

B. Defendant's Personal History at Sentencing

On September 25, 2003, the United States Probation Office ("USPO") filed defendant's PSR for his second sentencing. (Doc. 200). Defendant was, at that time, 29 years old and residing in Waterloo, Iowa, where he was also born. (Id., at 36). Defendant was raised by his mother in an "extremely dysfunctional home" until age 7, at which time he was removed and placed in various foster homes. (Id.). Defendant maintained a "good relationship" with his father even though his father was incarcerated for sexually abusing defendant's sisters. (Id.). His home life was described as impoverished, abusive, unstable, and dangerous. Defendant had many siblings, some of whom were incarcerated and some of whom had died due to medical issues.⁶ Defendant completed the requirements for a high school diploma at a training school and earned a vocational training certificate. (Id., at 42). He was employed at a club for a year prior to his arrest but had minimal work history beyond that. (Id., at 43-44). Defendant had four purported children across three relationships, although he disputed the paternity of two of them. (Id., at 37). Defendant was also married but requested a divorce. (Id.).

Defendant was in "good health" and "denied any history of significant health problems." (Id., at 38). He had been hospitalized a few times as a child for various accidents and once in 2000 for a gunshot wound to his heel after he was shot by his former girlfriend. (Id.). In 1983, a doctor found defendant had attention deficit disorder. (Id.). Testing suggested he had "organic brain damage," which explained his impulsive,restless, and "extremely hostile" behavior. (Id.). In 1986, an evaluation noted his behavioral issues were attributable to home and environmental factors. (Id., at 38-39). Defendant was diagnosed with atypical conduct disorder and adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features, characterized by depressive and anxious symptoms. (Id., at 39). Defendant was, at various times, sexually abused by a priest, a minister, and his mother's boyfriend. (Id., at 39-40). He was later diagnosed with depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and antisocial personality traits. Later...