United States v. Ramirez
1:11-cr-00043
| E.D. Tex. | Jun 27, 2025Background
- David Arzon pleaded guilty in 2019 to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 5kg or more of cocaine and was sentenced in 2020 to 135 months’ imprisonment and five years’ supervised release.
- He sought compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), arguing for extraordinary and compelling reasons including his health, rehabilitation, COVID-related conditions, and family circumstances.
- The government opposed the motion, and the United States Probation and Pretrial Services recommended denial after investigation.
- Arzon’s arguments included claims about his medical care (sleep apnea, alleged neglect), being the sole caregiver for his now-deceased mother, prison conditions during COVID-19, eligibility for greater sentencing reductions, and error in criminal history calculation.
- The court denied Arzon’s requests for counsel, motion for compassionate release, and related motions as moot, finding no extraordinary or compelling reasons for release and determining that the § 3553(a) factors did not support early release.
Issues
| Issue | Arzon’s Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appointment of Counsel | Needs assistance for complex legal arguments | No constitutional/statutory right to counsel on § 3582 motions | Denied; issues not complex, no exceptional circumstances |
| Compassionate Release—Medical | Sleep apnea, deteriorating health, inadequate care, risk from prison outbreaks | Medical records show regular care, non-compliance with treatment, conditions are not extraordinary | Denied; conditions not extraordinary, care adequate |
| Compassionate Release—Family | Sole caregiver for elderly mother with cancer | (Not disputed); mother is deceased (Probation confirmed) | Denied; argument moot since mother died |
| Compassionate Release—Other/Guideline Error | Offense level reduction, criminal history score error, rehabilitation | Sentencing arguments already litigated and denied; rehabilitation not extraordinary by itself | Denied; not proper grounds for compassion release, already addressed on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551 (no right to counsel in post-conviction proceedings)
- Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817 (finality of sentences and exceptions under § 3582)
- United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691 (district courts may deny compassionate release based on § 3553(a) factors, including sufficient time served)
- United States v. Thompson, 984 F.3d 431 (denial of compassionate release for allegedly heightened COVID risk; need for severe, unique exigency)
- United States v. Cooper, 996 F.3d 283 (scope of what constitutes extraordinary and compelling reasons, post-First Step Act)