USA v. Washington

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
ANTONIO D. WASHINGTON,
Defendant.
Case No. 3:15-cr-00104-SLG
ORDER REGARDING PRO SE LETTER
On November 23, 2020, the Court received the attached pro se letter from
defendant Antonio D. Washington, dated November 19, 2020. Mr. Washington’s
letter seeks reconsideration of the Court’s denial of his motion for compassionate
release.
The Court will take no further action based on Mr. Washington’s letter for
three reasons. First, Attorney Jane Imholte is listed as the defendant’s counsel of
record. Earlier this week, the Court ordered Ms. Imholte to give notice of her status
of representation of Mr. Washington; the status is not due until November 30,
2020.1 At this time, Mr. Washington is still represented by counsel.
Second, earlier this week the Court denied reconsideration of the denial of
compassionate release.2
1 Docket 92 at 1–2.
2 Docket 92 at 2.
Case 3:15-cr-00104-SLG Document 95 Filed 11/25/20 Page 1 of 2

Case No. 3:15-cr-00104-SLG, United States v. Washington
Order Re Pro Se Letter
Page 2 of 2
Third, earlier this week Mr. Washington filed, and the Court accepted, a
notice of appeal of the denial of compassionate release.3 The Ninth Circuit has
received the notice of appeal, issued a docket number, and set a briefing
schedule.4 This Court no longer has jurisdiction to hear a motion for
reconsideration of the compassionate release denial because the denial is the
subject of the appeal.5 Mr. Washington must seek any relief related to the
compassionate release denial from the Ninth Circuit, not from this Court.
The Clerk of Court is directed to docket Mr. Washington’s letter as an exhibit
to this order and is directed to serve the defendant and counsel of record with a
copy of this order. The Court will take no further action based on the defendant’s
letter.
DATED this 25th day of November, 2020, at Anchorage, Alaska.
/s/ Sharon L. Gleason
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3 Docket 92 at 1.
4 Docket 93; Docket 94.
5 United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 941 (9th Cir. 2007) (“Once a notice of appeal is filed, the
district court loses jurisdiction over a case.”); Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459
U.S. 56, 58 (1982) (per curiam) (“The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional
significance—it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its
control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.”).
Case 3:15-cr-00104-SLG Document 95 Filed 11/25/20 Page 2 of 2