USA v. Villarreal et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 5:18-CR-00048-KDB-DSC-13
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s fourth pro se motion for
compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), the First Step Act of 2018 and
appointment of counsel. (Doc. No. 432). Defendant seeks compassionate release arguing he faces
a heightened risk of contracting COVID-19 while incarcerated at FCI Allenwood -Medium1 and
that, due to his medical conditions, he faces a heightened risk of a severe case of COVID-19 if he
were to contract the virus. Having carefully reviewed the Defendant’s motion, exhibits, and all
other relevant portions of the record, the Court will deny his motion as Defendant has not met his
burden to establish that a sentencing reduction is warranted under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c).
According to Defendant’s Presentence Report, he has been diagnosed with Type II diabetes
and high blood pressure and incurred a stroke in October 2017, requires a cane to walk and he
states that he experiences the loss of feeling in his face, arms and legs. (Doc. No. 291, ¶¶ 69, 70).
In his previous third motion, Defendant stated that he suffers from vitreous hemorrhage of both
1 According to the Bureau of Prison’s (BOP) website, FCI Allenwood - Medium currently has zero inmates and zero
staff with confirmed active cases of COVID-19. There has been no inmate deaths and no staff deaths, while 463
inmates have recovered and 54 staff have recovered. Additionally, at the FCI Allenwood - Medium, 502 staff have
been fully inoculated and 2,565 inmates have been fully inoculated.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. ORDER
MARTIN VIDAL SANTILLAN,
Defendant.
Case 5:18-cr-00048-KDB-SCR Document 433 Filed 03/06/23 Page 1 of 4

eyes, macular edema of both eyes, traction detachment of both eyes, hypertension, Type II
diabetes, cerebrovascular disease, vertigo, and complications from a stroke. (Doc. No. 421,
Exhibit 1, at 2). In the minimal BOP medical records (only covering late 2019) submitted by the
Defendant, it showed that he did have vitreous hemorrhage of both eyes, macular edema of both
eyes, traction detachment of both eyes, Type II diabetes, hypertension, and cerebrovascular
disease. (Doc. No. 422, at 3, 9). However, the same records also showed that he had been to
ophthalmology consults and is receiving treatment for his ailments. (Doc. No. 422). In his current
motion, Defendant also claims that he suffers from lung disease, asthma, obesity, high cholesterol,
total blindness in right eye and sixty percent blindness in the left eye. (Doc. No. 432 at 1).
Defendant also claims to be confined to a wheelchair and experiencing greater difficulty providing
self-care. Id. at 2. Defendant fails to provide his BOP medical records to substantiate these
additional medical claims and therefore, there is no extraordinary and compelling reason for a
sentence reduction.
The Government previously reported that Defendant is fully vaccinated against COVID-
19 as he received the first dose of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine on April 14, 2021, and the
second dose on May 12, 2021. (Doc. No. 424, Exhibit 1, Exhibit 2). Additionally, the Defendant
received a Moderna booster on March 10, 2022. (Doc. No. 424, Exhibit 2). The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have evaluated the COVID-19 virus and explained that
vaccines “continue to be highly effective at preventing hospitalizations and death.” CDC, Benefits
of Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine, www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-
benefits.html. The CDC also notes that vaccines currently available in the United States have been
shown to be “highly effective” at preventing COVID-19. Accordingly, the Court finds no
extraordinary and compelling reason for Defendant’s release.
Case 5:18-cr-00048-KDB-SCR Document 433 Filed 03/06/23 Page 2 of 4

Defendant argues that his imprisonment during the COVID-19 pandemic – something not
anticipated by the sentencing court – increased his prison sentence’s punitive effect and constitutes
extraordinary and compelling circumstances that warrant a sentence reduction. “While
circumstances that ‘undoubtedly increase a prison sentence’s punitive effect’ may constitute
extraordinary and compelling circumstances in some individual cases, United States v. Kibble, 992
F.3d 326, 336 (4th Cir. 2021) (Gregory, J., concurring), if every defendant who experiences
hardship during incarceration is entitled to a finding of extraordinary and compelling
circumstances, compassionate release would become the ‘exception that swallows the general rule
of finality’. United States V. Hancock, No. 1:06-CR-206-2, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41526, 2021
WL 848708, at *5 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 5, 2021).” United States v. Chavis, No. 1:18-CR-481-3, 2021
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124143, at *8-9 (M.D.N.C. July 2, 2021). Moreover, the “hardships” that
Defendant claims to have experienced in prison during the COVID-19 pandemic are not particular
to Defendant. Many inmates, as well as non-incarcerated individuals, have been infected with the
COVID-19 virus and survived (or feared being infected with the virus), lost close relatives or
friends due to the pandemic, and endured isolation, limits on movement, and other restrictive
protocols during the pandemic. See United States v. Murry,_ F.Supp.3d__, 2021 WL 1899362,
2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90792 at n.2 (E.D. Va. May 11, 2021); United States v. Burks, No.3:14-
CR-208-MOC-1, 2021 U.S. Dist LEXIS 70934, 2021 WL 1394857, at *4 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 13,
2021). Thus, Defendant’s incarceration during the pandemic does not constitute “extraordinary
and compelling” reasons warranting early release.
There is no general constitutional right to appointed counsel in post-conviction
proceedings. See Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); United States v. Williamson,
706 F.3d 405, 416 (4th Cir. 2013). The Court has discretion to appoint counsel in proceedings
Case 5:18-cr-00048-KDB-SCR Document 433 Filed 03/06/23 Page 3 of 4

under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) if the interests of justice so require. See United States v. Legree, 205
F.3d 724, 730 (4th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Reed, 482 F. App’x 785, 786 (4th Cir.
2012); cf. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (providing the interests of justice standard for appointment of
counsel in similar post-conviction proceedings).
Defendant has not established that the interests of justice require appointment of counsel
in these circumstances at this time.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s fourth pro se motion for
compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), and appointment of counsel (Doc.
No. 432), is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: March 6, 2023
Case 5:18-cr-00048-KDB-SCR Document 433 Filed 03/06/23 Page 4 of 4