United States v. Poff

Case: 21-20649 Document: 00516530233 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/01/2022

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
No. 21-20649 November 1, 2022
Summary Calendar
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Julia Ann Poff,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:17-CR-669-1

Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Julia Ann Poff, federal prisoner # 30835-479, filed seven motions in
the district court. All were denied. She now appeals the denials.
Poff filed a motion to stay collection of the restitution order in her
criminal sentence pending challenges to the sentence and a motion for leave

*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-20649 Document: 00516530233 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/01/2022

No. 21-20649

to file a repetitive petition for compassionate release due to COVID-19. The
controversies underlying these motions no longer exist. These issues are
moot. See Center for Individual Freedom v. Carmouche, 449 F.3d 655, 661 (5th
Cir. 2006).
The district court denied Poff’s motion to view sealed material. This
material was not relevant to the furtherance of any litigation. The district
court also denied Poff’s motion to reduce her sentence based on her record
of rehabilitation. Neither of these motions had a basis in law. See United
States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994). Poff has not shown that the
district court erred in denying the motions.
Poff argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying her
motion to modify the conditions of her supervised release to incur debt. The
district court determined that, because she was still incarcerated, the
challenge to the conditions of her supervised release was premature. Poff has
not shown that this was an abuse of discretion. See United States v.
Carmichael, 343 F.3d 756, 761, 762 (5th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Poff challenges the denials of her two motions seeking release
based on COVID-19. We review such denials for an abuse of discretion.
United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020); United States v.
Rabhan, 540 F.3d 344, 346-47 (5th Cir. 2008). The amount of explanation
required of the district court is dependent on the circumstances of the case,
including prior proceedings. Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959,
1965 (2018). Poff fails to establish that the district court’s denials of her
motions for compassionate release were abuses of discretion.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Poff’s motions
seeking a ruling on her restitution issue, seeking to compel the district court
to enter reasons for the denials, and seeking release pending appeal are
DENIED AS MOOT.

2