USA v. Mark Belidor

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-11906
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MARK BELIDOR,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 1:07-cr-20096-PCH-1
____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-11906 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 01/18/2023 Page: 1 of 4

-- 1 of 4 --

2 Opinion of the Court 22-11906
Before WILLIAM PRYOR , Chief Judge, NEWSOM , and G RANT, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Mark Belidor, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his
motion for compassionate release. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). The
district court ruled that Belidor failed to identify an extraordinary
and compelling reason to warrant early release, U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13,
and that the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a),
weighed against granting relief. The United States moves for a
summary affirmance and to stay the briefing schedule. Because
“the position of [the United States] . . . is clearly right as a matter of
law so that there can be no substantial question as to the outcome
of the case,”
Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162
(5th Cir. 1969), we grant the motion for summary affirmance and
deny as moot the motion to stay the briefing schedule.
A jury convicted Belidor of possessing a firearm as a felon.
18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g), 924(e). Belidor’s presentence investigation re-
port stated that he was subject to an enhanced sentence as an
armed career criminal and recounted his long criminal history,
which included convictions for resisting an officer with and with-
out violence, strong-arm robbery, trespassing, and obstruction of
justice. For the underlying offense, the report stated that a traffic
stop of Belidor’s vehicle revealed a dead passenger, Belidor wearing
a bulletproof vest, and two handguns, a high-powered rifle, and
several loaded magazines. At sentencing, Belidor stated that he
USCA11 Case: 22-11906 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 01/18/2023 Page: 2 of 4

-- 2 of 4 --

22-11906 Opinion of the Court 3
agreed with his classification as an armed career criminal. The dis-
trict court found that Belidor’s offense was “about as violent and
dangerous a scene as [it] ha[d] ever heard of” and sentenced him to
a guideline range sentence of 226 months of imprisonment. We af-
firmed Belidor’s sentence.
United States v. Belidor, 279 F. App’x
924 (11th Cir. 2008).
In March 2022, Belidor moved for compassionate release. 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Belidor argued that he established extraor-
dinary and compelling reasons for his release due to COVID-19, his
health conditions of obesity and hypertension, and his erroneous
designation as an armed career criminal. The district court denied
Belidor’s motion. The district court ruled that Belidor’s medical
conditions were not extraordinary or compelling because he was
receiving treatment for them and had been fully vaccinated against
COVID-19. The district court also recounted the “serious and vio-
lent” nature of Belidor’s offense and ruled that he remained a dan-
ger to the community and that the sentencing factors weighed
against granting him relief.
Summary affirmance is appropriate because there is no sub-
stantial question that Belidor is not entitled to compassionate re-
lease.
See Groendyke, 406 F.2d at 1162. Belidor argues that his
comorbidities—obesity and hypertension—increase his chance of
medical complications from COVID-19. But Belidor’s medical rec-
ords reflect that he is receiving treatment for those conditions, is
fully vaccinated against COVID-19, and has received a booster vac-
cine. Insofar as Belidor argues that his “invalid” designation as an
USCA11 Case: 22-11906 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 01/18/2023 Page: 3 of 4

-- 3 of 4 --

4 Opinion of the Court 22-11906
armed career criminal constitutes an extraordinary and compelling
reason to reduce his sentence, his argument is foreclosed by prece-
dent. In
United States v. Bryant, 996 F.3d 1243 (11th Cir. 2021), we
held that the policy statement in section 1B1.13 governs a motion
for compassionate release, whether it is filed by the Bureau of Pris-
ons or by a prisoner, and that a district court cannot “develop
‘other reasons’ that might justify a reduction in a defendant’s sen-
tence.”
Id. at 1247-48. As for Belidor’s argument that the district
court erred by not addressing his rehabilitation efforts, the district
court was not required to afford weight to his rehabilitation,
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.3, and it did not abuse its discretion by
placing greater weight on the seriousness and violent nature of his
offense.
See United States v. Harris, 989 F.3d 908, 912 (11th Cir.
2021).
We GRANT the motion for summary affirmance, AFFIRM
the denial of Belidor’s motion for compassionate release, and
DENY AS MOOT the motion to stay the briefing schedule.
USCA11 Case: 22-11906 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 01/18/2023 Page: 4 of 4

-- 4 of 4 --