United States v. Carralero-Escobar, 20-2093

Defendant Nelson Carralero-Escobar pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced in March 2020 to 57 months' imprisonment.
At sentencing and on motion, Carralero emphasized advanced age (65) and serious health problems, including severe COPD; he sought release in light of COVID-19.
In May 2020 he moved for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i); the district court agreed extraordinary and compelling reasons existed but denied relief, finding he still posed a danger and that § 3553(a) factors did not support reduction.
The district court’s reasoning tracked language from the Sentencing Guidelines policy statement USSG § 1B1.13, which the parties and court treated as applicable at the time of the proceedings.
After briefing but before this appeal, this Circuit decided that § 1B1.13 does not control defendant-filed compassionate-release motions (United States v. McGee); the appeal raises (1) whether the district court erred by applying § 1B1.13 and (2) whether the denial was an abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred by applying USSG § 1B1.13 to a defendant-filed § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion	Carralero: § 1B1.13 does not apply to defendant motions, so reliance on it was error	Government: § 1B1.13 applied below; Carralero failed to preserve the argument	Court: Error was plain under McGee, but harmless because the court independently denied relief based on § 3553(a); no reversal under plain-error review
Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying compassionate release (finding continued danger and weighing § 3553(a) factors)	Carralero: His age and medical frailty reduced any risk of recidivism and community danger	Government: Criminal history and firearm possession show continued risk despite health problems	Court: No abuse of discretion—the court considered § 3553(a), credited health but reasonably found a continuing danger given the firearm offense; denial affirmed

United States v. McGee, 992 F.3d 1035 (10th Cir. 2021) (policy statement § 1B1.13 does not control defendant-filed compassionate-release motions)
Molina-Martinez v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1338 (2016) (Guidelines range functions as sentencing lodestar and miscalculation can affect outcome)
United States v. Chavez, 723 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 2013) (plain-error standard explained)
United States v. Ansberry, 976 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2020) (issue-preservation requires alerting the district court and obtaining a ruling)
United States v. Battle, 706 F.3d 1313 (10th Cir. 2013) (denial of sentence-modification motion reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Henderson v. United States, 568 U.S. 266 (2013) (plain-error assessed based on law at time of appeal)
United States v. Piper, 839 F.3d 1261 (10th Cir. 2016) (§ 3582 relief requires consideration of § 3553(a) factors but not the § 3553(c) explanatory requirement)