Bid for early release rejected based on history of violations

Where a defendant seeking compassionate release due to Covid previously violated the conditions of his supervised release by committing additional crimes, including possession with intent to distribute and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, his motion was denied.

Background

Michael Deon Stephenson pled guilty on May 23, 2019, to possession with intent to distribute (Count One) and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (Count Two). The maximum term of imprisonment for Count One was 20 years and for Count Two was 10 years. On Oct. 2, 2019, the court sentenced defendant to 72 months of imprisonment on these convictions. These convictions also resulted in the defendant being found guilty of violating the conditions of his supervised release in a previous criminal case. As such, the court sentenced the defendant to 33 months of imprisonment for that violation, to be served consecutively to the 72-month sentence imposed in this criminal case.

Stephenson filed the motion for compassionate release in both cases. Judge Allen previously denied the motion for compassionate release filed in the other criminal case.

Analysis

After a careful review of the motion, memorandum, exhibits and other related documents, the undersigned agrees with Judge Allen that Stephenson’s age and health conditions do not support a finding of extraordinary and compelling reasons for a reduction in his sentence. His hypertension and weight could create an increased risk from COVID-19. But he does not have any medical conditions identified by the CDC as conclusively placing individuals at increased risk, and he is not in an age category that creates an increased risk. In addition, according to Bureau of Prison records, Stephenson has received both doses of the Pfizer vaccine, with the second dose having been administered on May 4, 2021.

Moreover, even if the court found that Stephenson had established an extraordinary and compelling reason for a reduction in his sentence, the court does not, in its discretion, find a reduction in sentence to be appropriate under the relevant § 3553(a) factors and nonbinding policy statements. The court finds that a reduction in Stephenson’s sentence would, in fact, undermine the relevant § 3553(a) factors.

In particular, a reduction in Stephenson’s sentence would undermine the need for the sentence to reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote respect for the law, provide just punishment and afford adequate deterrence, given the nature and circumstances of the underlying offenses and Stephenson’s history and characteristics. Of particular concern is Stephenson’s inability or unwillingness to abide by conditions of supervised release and comply with the laws of the United States.

Defendant’s motion for compassionate release denied.

United States v. Stephenson, Case No. 4:19-cr-18, Sept. 24, 2021. EDVA at Newport News (Young). VLW 021-3-461. 9 pp.