United States of America v. Aric Matthew Salazar

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ARIC MATTHEW SALAZAR,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 22-10014
D.C. No. 1:18-cr-00180-JLT-SKO-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Jennifer L. Thurston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 15, 2022**
Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
Aric Matthew Salazar appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, see
United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021), we affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
NOV 22 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-10014
Salazar contends that the district court erred by denying his motion because
he has serious medical conditions that have worsened during the pandemic; the
conditions in his prison make it impossible for him to avoid being reinfected with
COVID-19; vaccination does not protect him from new variants of the virus; the
Bureau of Prisons is not adequately treating the medical needs of inmates; he has
been rehabilitated; and other inmates have been granted compassionate release.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Salazar’s
arguments were insufficient to warrant release. The court acknowledged that some
of Salazar’s medical conditions put him at increased risk from COVID-19, but
reasonably concluded that the risk was mitigated by his age of 37, the fact that his
medical conditions were being managed with medication, and his plans to be
vaccinated. The court also reasonably concluded that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors did not support release given that Salazar had then served only about 20%
of his already below-Guidelines sentence. On this record, the court did not abuse
its discretion by denying relief. See United States v. Robertson, 895 F.3d 1206,
1213 (9th Cir. 2018) (stating that the district court abuses its discretion only if its
decision is illogical, implausible, or not supported by the record).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --