United States v. Anderson Coutinho-Silva
24-2247
3rd Cir.Mar 21, 2025Background
- Anderson Jose Coutinho-Silva is serving a 207-month sentence for Hobbs Act robbery, using a firearm during a crime of violence, and being an alien in possession of a firearm, stemming from an armed robbery where he shot a bystander.
- In 2023 and 2024, Coutinho-Silva filed motions to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), based on retroactive changes to the Sentencing Guidelines.
- The Government conceded his eligibility for reduction but argued that the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) weighed against such a reduction.
- The District Court denied the motion, citing the severity of the offense, the victim's continued opposition, Coutinho-Silva’s criminal history, and his poor post-incarceration disciplinary record.
- Coutinho-Silva appealed, arguing he no longer posed a danger to the community and that his infractions were not serious.
- The Third Circuit summarily affirmed the District Court’s denial, finding no abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2) | Eligible and no longer a danger | § 3553(a) factors oppose reduction | Denied; § 3553(a) factors not met |
| Post-incarceration conduct and community risk | Infractions not serious; deportation ends risk | Disciplinary record shows danger | Disciplinary history supports denial |
| Weight of victim impact and criminal history | Not addressed by plaintiff | Serious offense, victim's opposition, prior probation | Court properly considered these factors |
| District Court’s exercise of discretion | Abuse of discretion claimed | No abuse; reasoned appraisal | No abuse of discretion; affirmation |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mateo, 560 F.3d 152 (3d Cir. 2009) (outlines standard of review for sentence reductions)
- Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817 (2010) (explains the two-step process for § 3582(c)(2) sentence modifications)
- United States v. Styer, 573 F.3d 151 (3d Cir. 2009) (emphasizes the need for reasoned appraisal in sentence reduction decisions)
- Murray v. Bledsoe, 650 F.3d 246 (3d Cir. 2011) (standard for summary affirmance in the Third Circuit)