Kansas Cases January 12, 2021: United States v. Goodwin

Case Description

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Joal Goodwin's Motions for Release from Custody (Docs. 75, 81). He seeks early release from prison due to mental health issues, physical ailments, and the COVID-19 pandemic. The government opposes Defendant's motions. For the reasons stated in more detail below, the Court denies Defendant's motions.

On November 24, 2010, Defendant pleaded guilty to bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). On February 10, 2011, Defendant was sentenced to 151 months' imprisonment.

Defendant is 46 years old, and he is currently incarcerated at Allenwood USP. There have been 131 positive cases in the facility in which Defendant is housed, and no inmates have died.

Page 2

Currently, there are 92 active inmate cases, 25 active staff cases, and one pending inmate test. Defendant's projected release date is August 4, 2022.

On June 1, 2020, Defendant filed a pro se motion seeking compassionate release. Defendant was appointed counsel, and his counsel filed an amended motion to reduce his sentence on September 11, 2020. He requests a reduction to time served stating that due to mental health conditions, and other multiple underlying health conditions, he is more susceptible to severe complications should he contract COVID-19 in prison.

The First Step Act amended the compassionate release statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), to allow a defendant to file his own motion for release. It allows defendants to seek early release from prison provided certain conditions are met. First, "a criminal defendant may file a motion for compassionate release only if: '(1) he has exhausted all administrative rights to appeal the [Bureau of Prisons' ("BOP")] failure to bring a motion on his behalf, or (2) 30 days have passed since the warden of his facility received his request for the BOP to file a motion on his behalf.' " The administrative exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional and cannot be waived.

Page 3

Next, if a defendant satisfies the exhaustion requirement, the Court may reduce the defendant's sentence, after considering the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) to the extent they are applicable, if the Court determines: (1) "extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction;" or (2) "the defendant is at least 70 years of age, has served at least 30 years in prison, pursuant to a sentence imposed under section 3559(c) . . . and a determination has been made by the Director of the [BOP] that the defendant is not a danger to the safety of any other person or the community." Finally, the Court must ensure that any reduction in the defendant's sentence under this statute is "consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission."

Defendant seeks early release based on mental health concerns, underlying physical health conditions, and the spread of COVID-19 in prison. The government asserts that Defendant is not an appropriate candidate for early release.

A. Exhaustion

Defendant has satisfied the exhaustion requirement described in § 3582(c). He requested compassionate release from the Warden several times, with his latest request dated October 20, 2020. The Warden denied his requests on May 20 and October 23, 2020. More than thirty days

Page 4

have passed since Defendant requested compassionate release from the Warden, and the government concedes that Defendant meets the exhaustion requirement. Thus, the Court will proceed to determine the merits of Defendant's motion.

B. Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons

Defendant next asserts that his mental health and underlying medical conditions, coupled with the outbreak of COVID-19 in prison, constitutes an extraordinary and compelling reason warranting a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(1)(A). Defendant suffers from emphysema, asthma, chronic Hepatitis C, and bipolar disorder. One condition, asthma, is listed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") as one that might be at an increased risk of severe illness. Emphysema, Hepatitis C, and bipolar disorder are not listed at increased risk. Although the Court is sympathetic to Defendant's concerns and recognizes that Defendant's risk of contracting COVID-19 may be higher due to his underlying health conditions, he does not show a relatively high risk. Accordingly, Defendant does not meet his burden in demonstrating extraordinary and compelling circumstances warranting compassionate release.

C. Section 3553(a) Factors

Page 5

Finally, the Court considers whether Defendant's sentence reduction would comply with the sentencing factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) "to the extent that they are applicable." Some of these factors include the nature and circumstances of the offense; the need for the sentence imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offense, afford adequate deterrence, and protect the public from future crimes by the defendant; and the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities.

Defendant pleaded guilty to bank robbery. The sentencing guideline range was 151 to 188 months based on Defendant's career offender status. The Court sentenced Defendant to the low end of the range, 151 months. Defendant asserts that he would not qualify for career offender status and would not be subject to the same sentencing scheme today. Instead, because he would not be considered a career offender, his guideline sentence would be 57 to 71 months. Thus, he contends that he has adequately been punished.

At this point, Defendant has served approximately 85 percent of his sentence. The Court remains convinced that 151 months is the appropriate sentence although Defendant would no longer qualify for this sentence today. Defendant committed the serious offense of bank robbery,

Page 6

and he had prior criminal offenses. Furthermore, Defendant's prison record is far from ideal. Indeed, he has numerous violent and self-harming acts while incarcerated. He assaulted another inmate in late 2019, and his most recent acts of self-harm occurred in February and March of 2020. Thus, it appears that Defendant remains a threat to the public. Reducing Defendant's sentence to time served would not reflect the seriousness of Defendant's criminal conduct nor provide adequate deterrence or appropriate punishment. The Court finds that the 151-month sentence originally imposed remains sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to meet the sentencing factors in § 3553(a) and punish the offense involved. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Defendant does not demonstrate extraordinary and compelling reasons to warrant his early release from prison.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Release from Custody (Doc. 75) is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Amended Motion to Reduce Sentence - First Step Act (Doc. 81) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this 12th day of January, 2021.

/s/
ERIC F. MELGREN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE