United States v. Robinson

Case: 23-30155 Document: 00516931410 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/13/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-30155 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ October 13, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Robert E. Robinson, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:18-CR-228-1 ______________________________ Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Robert E. Robinson, federal prisoner # 20897-035, appeals the denial of his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). He argues that the district court erred by ruling that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weighed against granting compassionate release. Specifically, he contends that the district court failed to consider his circumstances as a _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-30155 Document: 00516931410 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/13/2023 No. 23-30155 whole, specifically asserting that the court failed to consider letters from community members showing that he participated in nonprofit organizations and also failed to consider his low PATTERN score. Robinson also argues that the district court abused its discretion by finding that he did not establish extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We review the denial of a motion for compassionate release for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). The district court denied Robinson’s motion on the ground that he was not entitled to compassionate release because the § 3553(a) factors did not weigh in his favor. Specifically, the district court found that Robinson committed a serious offense, had numerous prior drug convictions, and was likely to recidivate and pose a danger to the public. The district further found that releasing Robinson would not reflect the seriousness of his offense, afford adequate deterrence to his future criminal conduct, or protect the public. See § 3553(a). Robinson’s disagreement with the district court’s weighing of the sentencing factors is not sufficient to demonstrate an abuse of discretion. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion when it found that the § 3553(a) factors did not support Robinson’s early release, we need not consider his challenge to the district court’s finding that he did not establish extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting compassionate release. See § 3582(c)(1)(A). Accordingly, Robinson has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for compassionate release. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693-94. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2