United States v. Gomez-Carbajal, 8:18-cr-00163

Defendant Jorge Gomez-Carbajal pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute >=5 grams methamphetamine (Count Two) and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime (Count Three).
Court sentenced him to 70 months on Count Two and a consecutive 60 months on Count Three, to run consecutive to an earlier sentence in Case No. 8:14-cr-331; sentence and convictions were affirmed on appeal.
His 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion was denied. He then moved under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 seeking a sentence reduction.
Gomez-Carbajal argued his supervised-release term was tolled under Mont v. United States and that he has "covered offenses" under the First Step Act § 404(a), warranting consolidation of sentences/credits or plenary resentencing; he also requested compassionate relief.
The Court found he did not present extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release, did not identify statutory authority permitting a sentence modification, and was not eligible under the First Step Act because his offenses were not committed before August 3, 2010 nor affected by the Fair Sentencing Act.
The Court denied the § 3582 motion, concluding Mont does not provide a basis to reduce or consolidate his sentence absent statutory authority permitting modification.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Gomez‑Carbajal is entitled to compassionate-release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)	Seeks "compassion" and plenary resentencing	No specific extraordinary and compelling facts shown	Denied — no extraordinary and compelling reasons alleged
Whether § 3582(c)(1)(B) permits modification based on First Step Act "covered offense" status	Argues his offenses are "covered offenses" under First Step Act § 404(a) and support consolidation/credits	Offenses not committed before Aug 3, 2010 and penalties not modified by Fair Sentencing Act	Denied — not a "covered offense," First Step Act inapplicable
Whether sentence can be modified under § 3582(c)(2) due to lowered sentencing range	Implies relief based on sentencing-range changes	No showing he was sentenced under a range later lowered by 28 U.S.C. § 994(o) or guideline amendment	Denied — no applicable guideline amendment or lowered range shown
Whether Mont v. United States tolling of supervised release justifies sentence reduction or consolidation	Mont tolling of supervised-release terms implies credits/consolidation with new sentence	Mont addresses tolling of supervised-release; petitioner cites no authority that tolling creates basis for reducing or consolidating sentence	Denied — Mont does not authorize a § 3582 sentence reduction or consolidation absent statutory authority

Mont v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 1826 (Supreme Court holding that pretrial detention later credited as time served for a new conviction tolls the supervised‑release term)
United States v. Brown, [citation="791 F. App'x 785"] (11th Cir. 2019) (noting Fair Sentencing Act amendments applied only to cocaine and were irrelevant to defendant’s sentence)
United States v. Gomez-Carbajal, [citation="772 F. App'x 836"] (11th Cir. 2019) (affirming conviction and sentence)