SAMARITAN NEWSLETTER – 04-13- 2026

SAMARITAN PROJECTS

4415 Gladstone Blvd.

Kansas City, MO 64123

417 901 3000

attorneytnorridnews@gmail.com

samaritanprojects@gmail.com

2255/EVIDENTIARY HEARING. In the case of Monica Wright v. United States, Case No. 20-cr-40003, ECF 122 (C.D. Ill. Mar. 30, 2026), an evidentiary hearing has been ordered. The Project filed a 28 USC 2255 motion for Ms. Wright alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court has ordered an evidentiary hearing on the issues.

CR.RIS/MEDICAL. The Middle District of Florida granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Justina Holland, No. 6:20-cr-86, ECF 207 (M.D. Fla. March 31, 2026). Holland was sentenced to eight years on 22 counts of mail and wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and other fraud and theft offenses. The Court denied her multiple motions for compassionate release. She was released to home confinement in Oct. 2025. She is expected to finish her term and begin supervised release in March 2027. Holland again sought compassionate release on a variety of grounds, including those the Court had previously rejected. But one of those grounds was new: on Dec. 23, 2025, a doctor found lumps in both breasts and bloody discharge from her nipples and concluded she had a high risk of breast cancer, ordering BRCA testing. Then on Jan. 8, 2026, she received an urgent referral for an appointment with a breast surgeon. She filed the motion a week later, calling the referral an “emergency.” The Government’s attorney acknowledged the referral to a breast surgeon and stated that “there does not appear to be any documented emergency.” This response struck the Court as suspect. A few weeks earlier, the Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) published a report concluding that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) delayed scheduling urgent medical appointments, leading to the death by treatable cancer of an inmate sentenced by the Undersigned. See DEP’T OF JUST. OFF. OF INSPECTOR GEN., INVESTIGATION AND REVIEW OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS’ CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT AND MEDICAL TREATMENT OF FREDERICK MERVIN BARDELL AND RELATED REPRESENTATIONS TO THE COURT, UPON REFERRAL BY SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE ROY B. DALTON, JR., at 50–51 (2026) (“OIG Report”). Part of the OIG Report concluded that DOJ’s reliance on the BOP’s representations without further inquiry contributed to Frederick Bardell’s fate. One medical circumstance that qualifies is “[t]he defendant is suffering from a medical condition that requires long-term or specialized medical care that is not being provided and without which the defendant is at risk of serious deterioration in health or death.” USSG 1B1.13(b)(1)(C). The failure to provide inmates with urgent medical care is now a well-documented problem with the BOP. See OIG Report at 50–51. The BOP is simply unwilling or unable to provide appropriate medical care. The Court was not happy about releasing Ms. Holland prematurely. She is a convicted con artist. United States v. Justina Holland, No. 6:20-cr-86, ECF 207 (M.D. Fla. March 31, 2026). A client who repeatedly fails to comply with court orders and OIG recommendations falls into the “trust but verify” category of governmental agencies. There can be no presumption of regularity. The Bureau of Prisons will emerge unscathed, while the Government’s lawyer—and most importantly, the inmate—will carry the scars of its misfeasance. See United States v. Bardell, No. 6:11-cr-401 (M.D. Fla. 2011); OIG Report at 47, 50–51. Sentence reduced to time served.

CR.RIS/DISPARITY. The Western District of Virginia granted in part at CR.RIS motion in United States v. Dominique Jones, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73272 (W.D. Va. Apr. 1, 2026). A jury found Dominique guilty of one count of conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 28 grams or more of crack cocaine, and sentenced to a term of 280 months. The court finds that Dominique's case involves a combination of extraordinary and compelling reasons that warrant a sentence reduction. The first is the sheer disparity in the sentences that Dominique and Oshay are serving for the same offense. Equally extraordinary and compelling is the fact a substantial mistake was made in the PSR prepared by the Probation Office that was used to sentence both men. The error went undetected by Dominique and Oshay's counsel, the prosecutor, the probation officer and the court at the time of sentencing, resulting in a significantly higher total offense level for both, which in turn resulted in a higher guidelines sentencing range for both. Oshay was able to address the mistake via post-conviction motions, while Dominique was unable to do so because of the procedural posture of his case at the time he learned of the error. Dominique argues that an unwarranted sentencing disparity exists between him and Oshay, as well as between him and the other defendants in the conspiracy, and that the court can address the disparity via USSG 1B1.13(b)(5).The court concluded that Dominique had shown an extraordinary and compelling reason for a sentence reduction based on the Snead drug weight mistake in his PSR. Sentence reduced from 280 months to 250 months.

CR.RIS/REHABILITATION/DISPARITY. The District of Maryland granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Tyrone Allen, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68294 (D. Md. Mar. 30, 2026). Allen pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and was sentenced to 196-months. He is currently residing in a halfway house in Baltimore, where he is serving the rest of his sentence. His projected release date is May 28, 2027. Allen's first proffered extraordinary and compelling reason for release is that all but one of his nine co-defendants have been released from prison. A disparity in sentencing between co-defendants may constitute an "extraordinary and compelling" reason for sentence reduction. That disparity amounted to an extraordinary and compelling reason to reduce Allen's sentence. Allen's commendable record of rehabilitation speaks for itself. While incarcerated at FCI Prison Camp, before being transferred to a halfway house in Baltimore, Allen maintained employment, attended religious services weekly, and completed over eighty rehabilitation programs and classes, including a drug abuse program. The court held these efforts, coupled with the sentencing disparities explained above, amount to extraordinary and compelling reasons for the Court to reduce Allen's sentence. Sentence reduced to time served.

CR.RIS/REHABILITATION/DISPARITY/MEDICAL. The Southern District of New York granted in part a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Dennis Gogel, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67855 (S.D. N.Y. Mar. 30, 2026). Gogel pled guilty to charges of conspiring to import cocaine into the United States, conspiring to murder a law enforcement agent and a person assisting a law enforcement agent, conspiring to possess a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, and conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine aboard a U.S.-registered aircraft and was sentenced to 240 months. Gogel has suffered debilitating and humiliating symptoms, including fatigue, depression, insomnia, and physical manifestations due to hormonal abnormalities. He developed Hashimoto's disease, a malady that is uncommon in men, and experiences symptoms of mood disorders, cramping, migraines, anxiety, insomnia, and vertigo. Gogel also reports a variety of physical injuries, including herniated discs in his lumbar and thoracic regions, as well as a torn bicep. Gogel's notable rehabilitative efforts and the BOP's determination that he presents a low risk of recidivism favor a reduction in sentence. Sentence reduced to 210-months imprisonment.

CR.RIS/DISPARITY/REHABILITATION. The District of Maryland granted in part a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Kedrick Jenifer, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66811 (D. Md. Mar. 30, 2026). Jenifer pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and was sentenced to 240 months. Jenifer argued the unwarranted sentencing disparity between both his co-defendants and other similarly situated defendants, coupled with his rehabilitation efforts, constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting a sentence reduction. Jenifer was the leader of a drug trafficking organization that transported large quantities of cocaine, and his drug trafficking organization transported no less than 450 kilograms of cocaine. A disparity in sentencing may constitute an "extraordinary and compelling" reason for sentence reduction. He has participated in numerous educational programs, including personal development, emotional regulation, and career courses. Sentence reduced from 240 months to 204 months.

APPEAL/2255/CAREER OFFENDER. The Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded United States v. Casildo, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 8248, 2026 WL 878319 (9th Cir. Mar. 31, 2026). The case concerns an individual convicted of two counts of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and one count of conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance. At sentencing, the district court classified him as a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines, based on two prior convictions: one federal conviction for distribution of cocaine and one Nevada state conviction for the sale of controlled substances under Nevada Revised Statute 453.321(1)(a). This classification resulted in a higher sentencing range, and he ultimately received a sentence of 235 months, substantially longer than a similarly situated co-defendant. After his direct appeal was unsuccessful, he filed a pro se motion under 28 USC 2255 in the District of Idaho, arguing his prior Nevada conviction was not a qualifying “controlled substance offense” for the purposes of the career offender enhancement. The district court held this claim was procedurally barred because it was not raised on direct appeal, and alternatively found that the prior conviction did qualify as a predicate offense. The Ninth Circuit held there was cause and prejudice to excuse the procedural default, finding his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the career offender enhancement, and this failure prejudiced the outcome. On the merits, the Ninth Circuit determined that the relevant Nevada statute is indivisible and overbroad, and therefore, his conviction under that statute cannot serve as a predicate offense for career offender status under the Guidelines. The court reversed the district court’s dismissal of the 2255 motion and remanded for resentencing.