United States of America v. Martin Anaya

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted April 21, 2026*
Decided April 24, 2026
Before
KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
REBECCA TAIBLESON, Circuit Judge
No. 25-2464
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MARTIN ANAYA,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of
Indiana, Hammond Division.
No. 2:10 CR 109
James T. Moody,
Judge.
O R D E R
Martin Anaya, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his motion for
compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Because the district judge
acted within his discretion by denying the motion, we affirm.
* We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and record
adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not significantly aid the
court. FED . R. A PP . P. 34(a)(2)(C).
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with F ED. R. APP . P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 25-2464 Page 2
In 2012, Anaya was found guilty of conspiracy to participate in racketeering
activity, see 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute
5 kilograms or more of cocaine and 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana, see 21 U.S.C.
§ 846. He was sentenced to 360 months’ imprisonment.
In 2025, he moved for compassionate release, see 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i),
proposing two extraordinary and compelling reasons for his release. First, his elderly
mother was incapacitated, and he was her only available caregiver. See U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.13(b)(3)(C) (policy statement). He asserted that she suffered from multiple
ailments, including diabetes, hypertension, and thrombosis; that she preferred to
receive care from a family member; and that the “personal and professional
obligations” of other family members left him “in the best position” to provide that
care. His mother also submitted a letter describing additional cardiac conditions,
namely a heart murmur and a clogged valve. Anaya’s second reason for release was
that his sentence was unusually long, see U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(6), and there had been a
change in relevant law since his conviction, namely Amendment 826 to the Sentencing
Guidelines (codified at § 1B1.3(c)), which excludes certain acquitted conduct from
sentencing calculations.
The district judge denied the motion, finding neither reason for release to be
extraordinary and compelling. Regarding family circumstances, the judge explained,
Anaya did not establish that his mother was incapacitated or that he was her only
available caregiver, as set forth in § 1B1.13(b)(3). As for the length of the sentence, the
judge said that Amendment 826 did not support Anaya’s motion because it was not
retroactive.
On appeal, Anaya challenges only the judge’s determination that his mother’s
need for a caretaker did not present an extraordinary and compelling reason for
compassionate release. But Anaya had the burden to establish that these circumstances
are sufficiently extraordinary and compelling, see United States v. Newton, 996 F.3d 485,
488 (7th Cir. 2021), and the judge appropriately exercised his discretion to conclude that
Anaya did not meet this burden. As the judge explained, Anaya did not introduce
evidence sufficient to show that his mother was incapacitated or that he was the only
available caregiver for her.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --