United States of America v. Donald Ross Foreman

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DONALD ROSS FOREMAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 21-30119
D.C. No. 9:14-cr-00042-DLC-2
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Dana L. Christensen, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2021**
Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Donald Ross Foreman appeals from the district court’s order denying his
motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion, see
United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021), and 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
DEC 22 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-30119
Foreman asserts that he is entitled to compassionate release in light of his
medical conditions and because the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weigh in favor of
release. Contrary to Foreman’s contention, the record reflects that the district court
properly considered each of his arguments for release, including the conditions at
his facility, the public health concerns generally posed by the COVID-19
pandemic, and the seriousness of his medical conditions. The court concluded,
however, that Foreman’s medical conditions were already accounted for in his
below-Guidelines sentence and that early release would “denigrate the seriousness
of his offense” and was not warranted under the § 3553(a) factors. The court’s
conclusion was reasonable in light of the record, and it did not abuse its discretion
in denying relief. See United States v. Robertson, 895 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir.
2018) (district court abuses its discretion only if its decision is illogical,
implausible, or without support in the record).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --