United States v. High

• Decision Date: 07 May 2021
• Docket Number: No. 20-7350,20-7350
• Citation: 997 F.3d 181
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Anthony Jerrod HIGH, Defendant - Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

997 F.3d 181

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.Anthony Jerrod HIGH, Defendant - Appellant.

No. 20-7350

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued: March 10, 2021

Decided: May 7, 2021

ARGUED: Elliot Sol Abrams, CHESHIRE, PARKER, SCHNEIDER, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Joshua L. Rogers, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Robert J. Higdon, Jr., United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Banumathi Rangarajan, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Niemeyer wrote the opinion, in which Judge Motz and Judge Rushing joined.

NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge:

Anthony High, who is currently serving an 84-month sentence of imprisonment, filed a motion in the district court for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) (authorizing district courts to "reduce the term of imprisonment" on finding "extraordinary and compelling reasons"). In his motion, High noted that he has a history of heart conditions that he maintained places him at an elevated risk of serious illness or death were he to contract COVID-19. And moreover, he argued, contracting COVID-19 was likely at a prison facility such as the Federal Correctional Institution at Ashland, Kentucky, where he was serving his sentence. He also relied on his rehabilitation in prison.

The government opposed High's motion, noting a number of measures that the Federal Bureau of Prisons was taking to protect FCI Ashland's prison population and the absence of any infection at the institution. It also argued that the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) "weigh[ed] heavily against reducing [High's] term of imprisonment."

The district court denied High's motion, relying on the § 3553(a) factors and the fact that High had "very recently [been] sentenced," at which time his § 3553(a) factors were also considered. It also noted that High had committed the crimes for which he had been sentenced "soon after [he] complete[d] [a prison sentence of] twenty years in state custody for a violent crime."

For the reasons given, we affirm.

I

A little more than a year after High was released from state prison, where he had served 20 years for a murder conviction, he began trafficking in illegal drugs. Between June 2017 and May 2018, he distributed at least 168 grams of crack cocaine, 6.61 grams of marijuana, and 10,325 grams of cocaine powder. Following his arrest in May 2018, he pleaded guilty to distributing crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). On January 16, 2019, the district court sentenced High to 84 months’ imprisonment, which represented a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 of over 60 months based on High's substantial assistance to the government. The Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") assigned High to FCI Ashland to serve his sentence.

Some 16 months after his sentencing, on May 11, 2020, High filed a motion in the district court for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). He stated:

This motion should be granted due to the "extraordinary and compelling reasons" confronting the federal prison system by the pandemic of Covid-19 and the fact that Mr. High, at age 42, is not a danger to the community; and because respect for the law and general deterrence, other notable Section 3553(a) factors, would not be undermined by converting the remainder of his sentence to home confinement given the cataclysmic events of the current pandemic.

In support of his motion, High noted that he had been diagnosed with several cardiovascular conditions 20 years earlier. Specifically, he stated that he had "an enlarged heart, heart flutter (A-fib), bundle branch blockage, [and] high blood pressure

." The medical records that he attached to his motion confirmed a history of atrial fibrillation and showed a recent EKG indicating a first-degree (the least severe) atrioventricular block and a right bundle branch block. The medical records also included a February 2020 record reporting High's blood pressure as 140/78, which was within the hypertension range, and a May 2020 record reporting it as 120/59, which was not in that range.

In his motion, High argued that his medical condition placed him at an elevated risk of becoming seriously ill or dying from COVID-19 and that this, combined with the likelihood that "the Covid-19 virus [would] spread[ ] through the facility of FCI Ashland," presented the type of "extraordinary and compelling reason[ ]" necessary for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). He argued further that the sentencing factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) also weighed in favor of relief. In that regard, he noted that he had "no infractions or disciplinary issues while incarcerated on the instant charges" and argued that placing him "on home confinement with electronic monitoring ... would afford adequate deterrence from any criminal conduct and protect the public."

The government opposed High's motion. It noted that there had not yet been any "confirmed coronavirus cases at FCI Ashland" and that the BOP was "actively working on the critical problem of containing the spread of the coronavirus within prisons." The government stated that, "among other steps, [the BOP had] limited access to prisons, restricted prisoner movements within prisons, used screening and testing, sought to educate inmates and staff on preventing the spread of disease, begun providing masks and hand cleaners, separated ill inmates, and — in appropriate cases — released inmates for home confinement." The government not only maintained that High failed to demonstrate the need for home confinement in this case, it also argued that "the [§] 3553(a) factors weigh[ed] heavily against reducing [High's] term of imprisonment." It emphasized his serious criminal history and argued that the requested reduction, when he had "only served roughly 34.1% of his prison term," would unduly minimize the scope and severity of his offense.

The district court denied High's motion. It noted that "[c]ompassionate release may be available to defendants where ... extraordinary and compelling circumstances warrant a reduction in sentence" but that such a reduction "must be consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the United States Sentencing Commission." The court also recognized that, "[i]n addition to considering whether extraordinary and compelling circumstances are present, a court must further consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors." And "here," the court concluded, "the § 3553(a) factors caution against relief." It explained:

Defendant was very recently sentenced, and he committed the offense in this action soon after completing twenty years in state custody for a violent crime. In light of this, the Court's assessment of the relevant sentencing factors has not changed. The sentence imposed remains sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to advance the goals of sentencing set forth in § 3553(a). Having reviewed the record and considered the relevant factors, the Court concludes that relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) is not warranted.

From the district court's August 31, 2020 order denying High's motion, High filed this appeal.

II

The COVID-19 pandemic has understandably prompted an increasing number of inmates to file motions for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). That provision authorizes district courts to reduce terms of imprisonment upon finding "extraordinary and compelling reasons." An inmate's serious medical condition can be the basis for such a finding, cf. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 cmt. 1(A), and COVID-19 raises medical issues in the prison context that are particularly serious — it is highly communicable; it is aggravated by certain other medical conditions; and it can be lethal. The underlying arguments for release from prison based on the coronavirus pandemic depend at least on allegations that the risk of contracting COVID-19 in a prison is higher than the risk outside the prison and that the inmate's preexisting medical condition increases that individual's risk of experiencing a serious, or even fatal, case of COVID-19. In a different way, actually contracting COVID-19 can also provide a compelling case for relief if coupled with a prison's inability to address the condition and circumstances calling for compassion.

We do not here undertake to elucidate the shape of qualifying medical conditions. This is statutorily committed to the Sentencing Commission. See 28 U.S.C. § 994(t) ; see also id. § 994(a)(2)(C). Nonetheless, depending on the circumstances, an inmate might well be able to present an extraordinary and compelling reason for release based on COVID-19. Resolution of such motions is a matter committed to the discretion of the district courts, and we review such rulings for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 328-29 (4th Cir. 2021) (per curiam); see also, e.g., United States v. Chambliss , 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). In doing so, we ensure that the district court has not acted arbitrarily or irrationally, has followed the statutory requirements, and has conducted the necessary analysis for exercising its discretion. See United States v. Dillard , 891 F.3d 151, 158 (4th Cir. 2018).

We begin our discussion of High's motion by noting that the default position stated in 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) is that a sentencing court "may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed." Nonetheless, Congress has provided a few exceptions to this general rule, including where, as invoked here, "extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant" a reduction of a defendant's sentence. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

For...