Samaritan Newsletter - June 9, 2025

SAMARITAN PROJECTS LLC

4415 Gladstone Blvd.

Kansas City, MO 64123

attorneytnorridnews@gmail.com

samaritanprojects@gmail.com

SAMARITANPROJECTS.COM – Website

The SAMARITAN-PROJECT prepares post-conviction and compassionate release motions under the direction of Attorney Tom Norrid. The Project retrieves documents at reasonable prices. The Project newsletter reports every winning district court and court of appeals case for the week in review. Our website – SAMARITANPROJECTS.COM is available to your family and friends.

SUPREME COURT GRANTS CERTIORARI IN DANIEL RUTHERFORD v. UNITED STATES, No. 24-820, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 2209 (S. Ct. June 6, 2025). QUESTION PRESENTED: The compassionate-release statute permits courts to reduce a prisoner’s sentence if the court finds that “extraordinary and compelling reasons” warrant relief. 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A). Congress placed only two limits on what can count as an “extraordinary and compelling reason”: (1) it must be “consistent with” “applicable policy statements” from the U.S. Sentencing Commission; and (2) “[r]ehabilitation of the defendant alone shall not be considered an extraordinary and compelling reason,” 28 USC 994(t). Sections 401 and 403 of the First Step Act of 2018 reduced penalties for certain drug and firearm offenses going forward. Because of these changes, individuals sentenced today for these offenses often face mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment decades shorter than they would have received before the First Step Act. THE QUESTION PRESENTED IS: Whether, as four circuits permit but six others prohibit, a district court may consider disparities created by the First Step Act’s prospective changes in sentencing law when deciding if “extraordinary and compelling reasons” warrant a sentence reduction under 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

TRUMP APPOINTS EX-BOP INMATE TO THE NUMBER TWO POSITION IN THE BOP. Joshua Smith was named Deputy Director at the BOP. Smith’s first experience with federal prison was not running one but being incarcerated in one. Far from letting his prison experience define his life, Smith’s path since prison is nothing short of astonishing. The Knoxville-based entrepreneur and prison reform advocate, is a prominent figure in criminal justice reform, especially following his presidential pardon by Donald Trump in January 2021. His journey from incarceration to successful entrepreneur and advocate offers a compelling narrative of personal transformation and dedication to societal change. However, will his experience as a prisoner, his success as an entrepreneur and his leadership ability be enough to help lead the BOP to better days? It will be one of the most trying experiences of his life but one he is certainly equipped to handle. In his youth, Smith became entangled in criminal activities, leading to his conviction on federal drug charges. He was removed from his home at age 11 due to abuse and was convicted of 10 felonies by the time he was 16 years old. He entered prison at age 21 as an 11th-grade dropout with no plans to exit it any differently than how he entered. He served a five-year sentence in a Kentucky federal prison camp, an experience that profoundly impacted his perspective on life. During his incarceration, Smith recognized the systemic challenges within the prison system and the pressing need for reform. He also knew he could do better. Smith said in a video on his website, Fourth Purpose, “Prison time for me shifted into an educational time rather than just doing time.” He credited his success with interacting with other inmates, many of whom were there for white collar offenses who encouraged him to learn more about business. Smith is a deeply religious person who found comfort in faith to turn his life around.

CR.RIS/MEDICAL/FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCES. The Southern District of California granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Kenneth Medina, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106422 (S.D. Calif. June 4, 2025). Negron pled guilty to importation of methamphetamine in violation of 21 USC 952 and 960. The Court sentenced Negron to 27 months followed by three years of supervised release. While Negron was on supervised release the Court sentenced him to six months for violating the terms of his supervised release. Negron is currently 63 years old and has low vision; suffers from type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia, polyneuropathy, hypertension, and heart diseases; and is overweight. Negron has developed vertigo while in custody and, as a result has lost feeling in both of his feet. Negron's family has experienced sudden and unexpected extenuating circumstances. His grandson has autism and requires a lot of care and attention, which his daughter, Maria Christina, has been unable to provide recently. Negron seeks this reduction in sentence based on the above-mentioned extenuating family circumstances and his worsening health condition pursuant to the "compassionate release" provision of 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A). Sentence reduced to time served.

CR.RIS/SENTENCE CREDIT. The Eastern District of Washington granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Oscar Trevino, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105357 (E.D. Wash. June 3, 2025). Pursuant to a plea agreement the defendant pled guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment charging him with Carjacking. The plea agreement contained the following provision: Defendant be sentenced to a term of imprisonment 84-months to be run concurrently with a 22 months sentence previously entered in State v. Washington v. Oscar Trevino, Case No. 19-1-01451-39. Defendant asked for credit for the time he spent in state custody from August 8, 2019 to May 2, 2021. He stated he believed he received ineffective assistance of counsel because at the time of his sentencing his state case had already been discharged which precludes the BOP from crediting him with the 22- months he served prior to the imposition of his federal sentence. In the normal course of events a defendant who asserts that his counsel provided ineffective assistance at sentencing would be required to present a 2255 motion. But what happens when counsel for the United States and defendant's counsel mislead the Court regarding the ability of the federal sentence to run concurrently to an underlying state sentence? In such a case, the short answer is extraordinary and compelling circumstances exist to justify and compel a reduction of the current sentence. The court reduced defendant’s sentence to 62-months.

CR.RIS/FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCES/1B1.13(b)(5). The District of Maryland granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Derrell Garrison, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103676 (D. Md. June 2, 2025). Garrison is serving a 60-month sentence for possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 USC 922(g)(1), and possession of controlled substances with the intent to distribute in violation of 21 USC 841(a)(1). Garrison argued he has extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release under USSG 1B1.13(b)(3) and 1B1.13(b)(5). One month after Garrison was sentenced his four-year-old son ("F.G.") drowned at a family pool party. This tragedy has devastated Garrison, F.G.'s mother ("J.H."), and their six-year-old son, M.G. The boys' mother, J.H., has struggled tremendously since F.G.'s death. Garrison has shown extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release under the "other circumstances" prong of USSG 1B1.13(b)(5). While in BOP custody Garrison has obtained his GED and participated in the Residential Drug Abuse Treatment Program ("RDAP"). Sentence reduced to time served.

CR.RIS/USSG 1B1.13(b)(6), (b)(5)/REHABILITATION. The Southern District of Florida granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Troy Cannon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105500 (S.D. Fla. May 28, 2025). Defendant is serving a life sentence for a non-violent drug offense (conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine). He has been incarcerated for over 21 years. When he was sentenced in 2004 the Court was required to impose a life sentence pursuant to 21 USC 851 because defendant had six prior "felony drug offenses"—five of which were for simple cocaine possession in violation of Florida Statute 813.13. If defendant were sentenced today none of his prior convictions would qualify as "serious drug felonies" (401 of the First Step Act of 2018 replaced "felony drug offenses" with "serious drug felonies"). Accordingly, rather than facing a mandatory life sentence he would face an advisory guideline range of 324 months to 405 months. Defendant sought a sentence reduction pursuant to the "unusually long sentence" provision of the Sentencing Commission's policy statement governing compassionate release and the "other reasons" provision. USSG 1B1.13(b)(5) & (b)(6). Because defendant has been in prison for at least 10 years and intervening changes in law highlight the unusually lengthy nature of defendant's sentence and "produce a gross disparity between the sentence being served and the sentence likely to be imposed at the time the motion is filed" he has established an extraordinary and compelling reason for a sentence reduction under 1B1.13(b)(6). Defendant established an extraordinary and compelling reason to modify his sentence under the more flexible standard of 1B1.13(b)(5). Most significant are: (1) the circumstances of defendant's 851 enhancement, (2) the disparity between defendant's sentence and the sentences of his codefendants as well as those sentenced for similar crimes after the First Step Act's changes to 851 enhancements, and (3) defendant's rehabilitative efforts. Defendant’s life sentence was reduced to 324-months.

APPEAL/RESENTENCE/REFUSE TO COOPERATE. The Second Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Klaudio Sterkaj, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS  12587 (2d Cir. May 23, 2025). Sterkaj was charged with transporting aliens within the United States after being stopped while driving two Albanian citizens who had entered the U.S. illegally. He waived indictment and pled guilty. The Government recommended a sentence of 6 to 12 months while the U.S. Probation Office suggested 0 to 6 months. The court imposed a 24-month sentence citing Sterkaj's refusal to cooperate with the Government as a factor. The Northern District of New York adopted the Probation Office's findings but varied upward from the recommended sentence due to Sterkaj's lack of cooperation. Sterkaj's counsel objected to the sentence as being outside the guidelines and preserved the argument for appeal. The Second Circuit found the district court's decision to increase Sterkaj's sentence based on his refusal to cooperate was procedurally unreasonable. The Court held a district court may not increase a defendant's sentence due to their refusal to cooperate. The court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing by a different judge to preserve the appearance of justice.