United States v. Ledezma-Rodriguez

472 F.Supp.3d 498

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,

v.Juan LEDEZMA-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant.

3:00-CR-00071

United States District Court, S.D. Iowa.

Signed July 14, 2020

Juan Ledezma-Rodriguez, (1), 12219-030, LEE - U.S., PENITENTIARY, Inmate Mail/Parcels, P.O. BOX 305, JONESVILLE, VA 24263, PRO SE.

Andrew James Graeve, Joseph D Herrold, James F Whalen, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE, 400 LOCUST STREET, SUITE 340, DES MOINES, IA 50309-2353, 515 309 9610, 515 309 9625 (fax), jim_whalen@fd.org, for Defendant.

Andrew H Kahl, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, 110 E COURT AVE, SUITE 286, DES MOINES, IA 50309, 515 473 9300, 515 473 9292 (fax), Andrew.Kahl@USDOJ.gov, Richard E. Rothrock, UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS OFFICE, 8 SOUTH 6TH STREET, SUITE 348, COUNCIL BLUFFS, IA 51501, (712) 256-5009, (712) 256-5112 (fax), Richard.Rothrock@USDOJ.gov, for Plaintiff.

ORDER GRANTING COMPASSIONATE RELEASE

ROBERT W. PRATT, Judge

Before the Court is Defendant Juan Ledezma-Rodriguez's renewed Motion for Compassionate Release, filed on July 1, 2020. ECF No. 216. The Government filed its Resistance on July 10. ECF No. 217. The matter is fully submitted.

I. BACKGROUND

Defendant was born in Michoacán, one of Mexico's western states, in 1973. ECF No. 146 ¶ 69. He exhausted available education opportunities with the sixth grade, id. ¶ 82, and unlawfully came to the United States around 1990, ECF No. 201-1 at 2. He thrice returned after deportation. ECF No. 146 ¶ 65. He married a woman in Oregon and fathered three children with her. Id. ¶ 72–73.

In the late 1990s, Defendant supplied methamphetamine and cocaine to some Iowans. Id. ¶ 7. He was a non-violent, low-level offender with no ties to large-scale criminal organizations or drug cartels. ECF No. 201-1 at 2–3. What distinguished Defendant from the many others appearing before the Court under similar circumstances was that statute required he spend the rest of his life in prison.

The Government charged Defendant in a 2001 seven-count superseding indictment with violations of immigration, firearm, and drug laws.¹ ECF No. 146 ¶ 1. The Government also filed two notices under 21 U.S.C. § 851 for prior minor drug convictions.² Id. ¶ 4. The jury convicted on four counts. Id. ¶ 3. Because of the prior two § 851 notices, the Court sentenced Defendant to life imprisonment, as statutorily required. Id. ¶ 4; see also ECF No. 201-1 at 1.

The Court has not hidden its conclusion that Defendant's sentence was "manifestly unjust." ECF No. 201 at 4. In 2016, the Court wrote a letter in support of clemency. Id. at 1. In 2017, it urged the U.S. Attorney to move to vacate Defendant's convictions under United States v. Holloway , 68 F. Supp. 3d 310 (E.D.N.Y. 2014). ECF No. 201 at 4. The Court supported such remedies because Defendant would face a mandatory minimum of just fifteen years if prosecuted today. See 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(A) ; 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).

This discrepancy is a purely arbitrary by-product of the points in time at which the offense conduct was prosecuted and Defendant was sentenced; it has no basis in the offense conduct itself, in the character of the Defendant, or even in the policy goals of sentencing espoused by our criminal justice system.

Id.

Circumstances and law have changed more, still, in 2020. The virus known as COVID-19 has killed more than 135,000 Americans and infected more than 3.3 million in a few months. Mortality Analysis , Johns Hopkins U. & Med. (July 13, 2020, 5:51 AM), https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality. "At this time, there is no known cure, no effective treatment, and no vaccine. Because people may be infected but asymptomatic, they may unwittingly infect others." S. Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom , ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1613, 207 L.Ed.2d 154 (2020) (Roberts, C.J., concurring). The virus is "devastating to those unfortunate enough to contract it. It attacks the nose, throat, and lungs of its victims, resulting in effects ranging from flu-like symptoms, to pneumonia, to acute respiratory disease, to death." Wilson v. Williams , 961 F.3d 829, 845 (6th Cir. 2020) (Cole, C.J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

We limit access to courts, schools, churches, theaters, and "non-essential" businesses—places where there are too many people and too little space to keep the virus from spreading. That sounds a lot like federal prison. Already "tinderboxes for infectious disease," prisons now are even more dangerous than we typically accept. United States v. Rodriguez , No. 2:03-CR-00271-AB-1, 451 F.Supp.3d 392, 394, (E.D. Pa. Apr. 1, 2020). At least 2938 inmates and 242 Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) employees have "open" and "confirmed" cases. COVID-19 Cases , Fed. Bureau Prisons (July 13, 2020), https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/. Ninety-four inmates and an employee have died. Id. Meanwhile, 5140 inmates and 615 staff have had the virus but recovered. Id. Although no inmates at USP Lee in Pennington Gap, Virginia, have yet tested positive, two employees have open and confirmed cases. Id.

It is hard to compare these numbers to those for the United States at large. This is so because it remains unclear when the BOP tests inmates or employees. See BOP Implementing Modified Operations , Fed. Bureau Prisons, https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/covid19_status.jsp (last visited July 13, 2020) (describing inmate screening procedures). The BOP screens staff through "self-reporting and temperature checks." Id.

The BOP indeed faces a daunting task. It has undertaken emergency measures to halt the virus's spread. Id. Social visits are cancelled, prisoner movement is limited, and legal visits are suspended subject to exception. Id. At the same turn, it is unclear what the future holds as states grapple with the virus's resurgence. E.g. , Arian Campo-Flores et al., U.S. Policy Patchwork Spurs New Covid Surge , Wall St. J., July 10, 2020, A1.

There is another difference between the time of Defendant's prior post-conviction motions and now: Congress granted district courts power to hear compassionate release motions directly from defendants.

See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) ; United States v. Brown , 411 F. Supp. 3d 446, 448 (S.D. Iowa 2019). On June 1, 2020, Defendant, through counsel, requested compassionate release from his warden. ECF No. 216-1 at 3. He argued (1) the fact he would not have received his life sentence under modern law; (2) his twenty years incarcerated; (3) his rehabilitation; (4) his need to care for his gravely ill mother; and (5) his risk of catching COVID-19 in prison constituted extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying release. Defendant acknowledged he would be deported following release. Id.

Defendant then filed the present Motion. ECF No. 216. The Government argues Defendant failed to present "extraordinary and compelling reasons" for release. ECF No. 217. However, citing this Court's prior rulings on compassionate release motions and the "facts of this case," the Government declined to make or "repeat" any specific arguments. Id.

II. ANALYSIS

The First Step Act of 2018 amended numerous provisions of the U.S. Code to promote rehabilitation of prisoners and unwind decades of mass incarceration. Cong. Research Serv., R45558, The First Step Act of 2018: An Overview 1 (2019). Congress designed the statute at issue here, § 3582(c)(1)(A), for "Increasing the Use and Transparency of Compassionate Release." § 603(b), 132 Stat. at 5239. This provision allows defendants, for the first time, to petition district courts directly for compassionate release. Id. Under the old regime, defendants could petition only the BOP Director, who could then make a motion, at his or her discretion, to the district court. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.13 cmt. n.4 (U.S. Sentencing Comm'n 2018) [hereinafter U.S.S.G.]. The Director rarely did so. Hearing on Compassionate Release and the Conditions of Supervision Before the U.S. Sentencing Comm'n (2016) (statement of Michael E. Horowitz, Inspector General, Dep't of Justice).

A. Exhaustion

The First Step Act's gate-keeping provision created two ways for a defendant to bring a compassionate release motion to a district court. The defendant may file a motion after he "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." § 3582(c)(1)(A) (emphasis added).

Here, Defendant satisfied the gate-keeping provision because thirty days have passed since the BOP received his request.³ ECF No. 216-1. The Court may address the merits.

B. Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons

Compassionate release provides a path for defendants with "extraordinary and compelling reasons" to leave prison early. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Such a sentence reduction must comply with the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and "applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission." § 3582(c)(1)(A).

1. Definitions

Congress never defined what constitutes "extraordinary and compelling." See 28 U.S.C. § 994(t). Instead, Congress directed the Sentencing Commission to promulgate "the criteria to be applied and a list of specific" extraordinary and compelling examples. Id. Before the First Step Act, the Commission provided just three: terminal illness, an elderly inmate's rapidly declining health, and care for dependent family members. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.1.

The Commission also provided a catch-all provision that allows the BOP Director to determine "there exists in the defendant's case an extraordinary and compelling reason other than, or in combination with, the" examples described above. Id. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.1(D). That still begs the question: what is extraordinary and compelling?

Congress and the Commission gave only two guideposts. Extraordinary and compelling reasons "need not have been unforeseen at the time of sentencing." Id. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.2. For example, just because a...