Case: 21-20090 Document: 00516352269 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 10, 2022
No. 21-20090 Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Travis White,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:13-CR-48-2
Before Jones, Stewart, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Travis White, federal prisoner # 73171-279, appeals the district
court’s denial of his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). He argues the district court erred by determining that he
had not established extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-20090 Document: 00516352269 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2022
No. 21-20090
release, given that his high blood pressure makes him particularly vulnerable
to severe illness or death if he were re-exposed to COVID-19 at his prison.
A district court’s decision whether to grant a sentence reduction
under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) is discretionary, not mandatory. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A); United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir.
2020). Accordingly, we review the denial of a § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for
abuse of discretion. Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693. A district court abuses its
discretion when its decision is based on a legal error or a clearly erroneous
assessment of the evidence. Id. at 693–94.
White fails to show that the district court’s assessment of the evidence
was clearly erroneous. He points out that he tested positive for COVID-19
and has been diagnosed with hypertension. But the district court considered
these facts—along with the fact that he remained asymptomatic as of his last
check-up and was on medication for his hypertension—and concluded that
he had not shown extraordinary and compelling reasons for a compassionate
release. This assessment was not clearly erroneous. See id.
White also argues the district court legally erred. Specifically, he
points out that there is currently no applicable policy statement governing
compassionate-release motions filed under the recently amended
§ 3582(c)(1)(A) and district courts are thus empowered to consider any
extraordinary and compelling reason for release that a defendant might raise.
See United States v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388, 393 (5th Cir. 2021) (holding that
district courts considering § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motions filed by prisoners are
not bound by § 1B1.13 of the U.S. sentencing guidelines or its commentary).
Construing White’s pro se brief liberally, he appears to argue that the district
court’s denial of his § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion—issued before Shkambi was
decided—was based on the considerations discussed in § 1B1.13 and its
commentary rather than the applicable factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
2
Case: 21-20090 Document: 00516352269 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/10/2022
No. 21-20090
Accordingly, he maintains that his case should be remanded in light of
Shkambi.
This argument fails. Even if a district court denies a compassionate-
release motion based in part on consideration of § 1B1.13 and its commentary,
that denial should be affirmed if the district court also reasonably determined
apart from § 1B1.13 that the defendant’s motion should be denied. See Ward
v. United States, 11 F.4th 354, 360–61 (5th Cir. 2021). Here, the district
court’s opinion did not explicitly invoke either § 1B1.13 or § 3553(a) in
concluding that the new facts White raised did not constitute “extraordinary
and compelling reasons” for compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
The district court reasonably tied its analysis and conclusions to the text of
§ 3582(c)(1)(A), and we will not assume without evidence that the court’s
analysis was entirely based on the incorrect premise that it was bound by
§ 1B1.13 and its commentary.
AFFIRMED.
3