United States v. Rafael Fernandez Garcia
20-12868
| 11th Cir. | Jul 19, 2021Background
- Rafael Garcia, pro se, moved for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), citing prior pulmonary embolism, multiple heart attacks, kidney stones, hypertension, atherosclerotic heart disease, and high cholesterol and arguing COVID-19 would be fatal to him.
- On the BOP form Garcia checked the "other: Extraordinary and Compelling Circumstance" box and listed pulmonary embolism in his written explanation.
- The district court denied relief after considering Garcia’s medical ailments and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors.
- Government argued Garcia had not shown an extraordinary and compelling reason under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 and that the catchall requires a BOP director determination.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed eligibility de novo and the denial for abuse of discretion, and affirmed the district court, concluding Garcia’s claims did not satisfy § 1B1.13.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Garcia showed "extraordinary and compelling" reasons under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 | Garcia: his medical history increases COVID-19 risk and is extraordinary/compelling | Gov: § 1B1.13 reasons are exhaustive; Garcia’s conditions aren’t terminal or permanently debilitating | Denied — Garcia’s conditions do not meet § 1B1.13 criteria |
| Whether the § 1B1.13 catchall (subpart D) can be invoked by district courts absent BOP director determination | Garcia invoked the catchall on his BOP form | Gov: catchall requires BOP director to identify other extraordinary reasons | Denied — catchall reserved to BOP director; district court cannot grant relief under subpart D without BOP action |
| Whether non‑terminal chronic conditions qualify under the medical provision (subpart A) | Garcia implied his ailments warranted release under medical grounds | Gov: subpart A is limited to terminal or permanently debilitating conditions preventing self‑care | Denied — Garcia did not show terminal or permanently debilitating conditions |
| Whether the district court failed to adequately analyze Garcia’s motion or consider § 3553(a) factors and sentencing‑disparity argument | Garcia: court did not thoroughly analyze extraordinary circumstances or sentencing disparity | Gov: district court considered Garcia’s ailments and § 3553(a) factors; sentencing disparity is not cognizable in § 3582 relief | Denied — court considered § 3553(a) and § 1B1.13; sentencing disparity is not a proper basis under § 3582(c)(1)(A) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bryant, 996 F.3d 1243 (11th Cir. 2021) (treating § 1B1.13 reasons as exhaustive and addressing who may identify catchall reasons)
- United States v. Harris, 989 F.3d 908 (11th Cir. 2021) (affirming denial where medical conditions did not constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons)
- United States v. Cook, 998 F.3d 1180 (11th Cir. 2021) (noting courts must consider all applicable § 3553(a) factors when ruling on compassionate release)
AFFIRMED.