United States v. Mitchell

• Citation: 471 F.Supp.3d 1130
• Decision Date: 08 July 2020
• Docket Number: NO. 2:14-cr-00339-RAJ,2:14-cr-00339-RAJ
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. William MITCHELL, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington

471 F.Supp.3d 1130

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,

v.William MITCHELL, Defendant.

NO. 2:14-cr-00339-RAJ

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle.

Signed July 8, 2020

Stephen Paul Hobbs, US Attorney's Office, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff.

ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR COMPASSIONATE RELEASE

Richard A. Jones, United States District Judge

I. BACKGROUND

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant William Mitchell's motion for compassionate release. Dkt. 48. Having thoroughly considered the parties’ briefing and the relevant record, the Court finds oral argument unnecessary and hereby DENIES the motion for the reasons explained herein.

Mr. Mitchell is serving his current sentence after pleading guilty to nine counts of Bank Robbery and one count of Interference of Commerce by Robbery. At his plea hearing on June 16, 2015, Mr. Mitchell agreed to the following facts as set forth in the plea agreement:

Count 1: On July 5, 2012, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in South Burlington, Vermont. He displayed to the teller what appeared to be a firearm, but was in fact a pellet gun. Mr. Mitchell demanded money and the teller complied, giving him approximately $3,080.

Count 2: On April 4, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Naples, Florida. He displayed to the teller what appeared to be a firearm, but was in fact a pellet gun. Mr. Mitchell demanded money and the teller complied, giving him approximately $5,600.

Count 3: On May 23, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Ocean Springs, Mississippi. He displayed to the teller what appeared to be a firearm. Mr. Mitchell demanded money and the teller complied, giving him approximately $3,000.

Count 4: On May 30, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Manchester, New Hampshire. He displayed what appeared to be a firearm and yelled "Nobody move!" Mr. Mitchell demanded money and the teller complied, giving him approximately $4,000.

Count 5: On July 28, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Seattle, Washington. He displayed what appeared to be a handgun, pointed it at the tellers, and demanded, "Cash now! Cash now!" The teller complied and gave him approximately $890. Mr. Mitchell admitted he displayed a real firearm (a .22 caliber revolver) during this robbery.

Count 6: On July 29, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Seattle, Washington. He displayed what appeared to be a handgun in his waistband and said to the teller, "Give me all your hundreds and fifties. Don't say anything or I will shoot you." The teller complied and gave him approximately $4,065. Mr. Mitchell admitted he displayed a real firearm (a .22 caliber revolver) during this robbery.

Count 7: On October 2, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Santa Barbara, California. He displayed what appeared to be a firearm to the teller and demanded money. The teller complied and gave him approximately $11,000.

Count 8: On October 30, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a bank in Olympia, Washington. He displayed what appeared to be a handgun in his waistband and demanded "hundreds and fifties." The teller complied and gave him approximately $950.

Count 9: On November 7, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered a credit union in Spokane, Washington. He approached a teller and said, "Give me your money. I am armed."

The teller complied and gave him approximately $100.

Count 10: On September 11, 2014, Mr. Mitchell entered the jewelry department of the Nordstrom department store in downtown Seattle, Washington. He approached two salespeople and asked to see various items of jewelry. Mr. Mitchell then displayed what appeared to be a firearm and said, "The jewelry is not yours. If you try and follow me or have me followed, I will shoot you both." Mr. Mitchell fled with three items of jewelry with a total value of $23,040.

Mr. Mitchell admits he used threatened force, violence, or fear when committing the above described crimes. Dkt. 31.

On January 22, 2016, this Court sentenced Mr. Mitchell to a 127-month term of imprisonment, imposed three years of supervised release to follow, and ordered him to pay $55,575 in restitution. Dkt. 46.

Mr. Mitchell is currently housed at FCI Yazoo City Low, with a projected release date of January 25, 2024.

On June 3, 2020, Mr. Mitchell filed the instant motion for compassionate release, requesting the Court reduce his custodial sentence to time served, with the remainder converted to home confinement and/or participation in a residential reentry center program for up to 180 days, with the originally ordered term of supervision to begin immediately upon his release. As an alternative, if the Court were to determine early release is not warranted, Mr. Mitchell has requested the Court direct the Bureau of Prisons to transfer him to a medical facility or to a Bureau of Prisons facility which has not experienced an outbreak of coronavirus 19 (COVID-19). Dkt. 48, 56.

Mr. Mitchell's motion sets forth four principal arguments he contends present extraordinary and compelling reasons for his immediate release: his age, race, and compromised health, combined with the current situation at Yazoo City Low related to the outbreak of the COVID-19 global pandemic.

Mr. Mitchell is a 61-year-old African American man. He claims his age and race, combined with his medical conditions which include a history of high blood pressure

and physical impairments due to a fracture of his C-5 vertebrae, place him at greater risk of suffering severe complications should he contract the virus. He contends FCI Yazoo City Low is unable to manage the pandemic, as evidenced by its high number of positive cases of COVID-19, including some deaths. Mr. Mitchell argues his release to the less risky environment of supervised release, home confinement, or a residential reentry program would not only protect him from increased risk of contracting COVID-19 and suffering complications associated with the virus, but also reduce the prison's overcrowding, improve staff-to-inmate ratios to inhibit the spread of the disease, and lessen the risks to other inmates. Mr. Mitchell contends he would not pose a danger to the community if released. Dkt. 48.

The government responds that because Mr. Mitchell has not presented extraordinary and compelling reasons for a reduction in sentence, and because he continues to present a danger to the community, his motion for compassionate release should be denied. The government argues that other than the general factors of his age and race, Mr. Mitchell has not made a showing that he has a specific medical condition that places him at risk for COVID-19, and that even if he does suffer from high blood pressure

, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) indicates high blood pressure only becomes a risk factor in connection with serious heart conditions. Moreover, the government notes Mr. Mitchell's medical records do not contain evidence that he suffers from high blood pressure

. Additionally, the records do not contain an indication that Mr. Mitchell has tested positive for COVID-19. Finally, the government notes that Mr. Mitchell's claim to be at higher risk to become severely ill from COVID-19, and that his risk of contracting COVID-19 while in custody is significantly higher than if he were to be released, is a claim that would apply to everyone in confinement and does not constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons to grant Mr. Mitchell's motion. Dkt. 51.

The government states that even if Mr. Mitchell was able to establish he has been diagnosed with medical conditions that place him at greater risk, releasing him would present a significant danger to others and to the community. Dkt. 51.

As to Mr. Mitchell's argument his age places him at higher risk, the government indicates the CDC lists those at higher risk as individuals age 65 and older. Mr. Mitchell is currently 61 years of age, and therefore not within the group with that particular risk factor. Dkt. 51.

While the government does not dispute that African Americans and other minorities have suffered disproportionately during the pandemic, it points to the suggestion of the CDC that the disproportionate rate of severe outcome is due to living conditions, work circumstances, lack of access to health care, and underlying health conditions. The government argues that the singular fact that Mr. Mitchell is African American does not elevate his risk of suffering from complications if he were to contract COVID-19. The government outlines in detail the steps being taken by the Bureau of Prisons at FCI Yazoo City Low to address the spread of the virus. Dkt. 51.

Finally, the government sets forth Mr. Mitchell's lengthy criminal history, indicating Mr. Mitchell would be a danger to others and to the community should his sentence be reduced to time served and he be released under any of the conditions proposed by Mr. Mitchell. For these reasons, the government argues Mr. Mitchell's motion for compassionate release should be denied. Dkt. 51.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Legal Standard for Compassionate Release

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) allows a court to reduce a term of imprisonment if "extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction" and "such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission." The Sentencing Commission's policy statement, in turn, says that a court may reduce a term of imprisonment if "the defendant is not a danger to the safety of any other person or to the community" and "extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction." United States Sentencing Guidelines ("USSG") § 1B1.13. The policy statement clarifies that such reasons exist when (1) "the defendant is suffering from a terminal illness" or (2) "the defendant is suffering from a serious physical or mental condition ... that substantially diminishes the ability of the defendant to provide self-care within the environment of a correctional facility and from which he or she is not expected to recover." USSG § 1B1.13 cmt. n.1. The policy statement also directs a court to...