USA v. Toney et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
United States v. Wilton Toney
Case No. 3:18-cr-00012-TMB
By: 	THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY M. BURGESS
PROCEEDINGS: 	ORDER FROM CHAMBERS
The matter comes before the Court on Defendant Wilton Toney’s Motion for Reduction in
Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) (the “Motion”).1 Toney argues that his sentence
should be reduced because his (1) “advanced age” and (2) “serious medical conditions” place him
at an “elevated risk for future medical complications.”2 United States Probation and Pretrial
Services (“USPO”) supports the Motion,3 while the United States of America (the “Government”)
opposes it.4
In the Motion, Toney contends that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) is unable to provide the
treatment he needs for his medical conditions, which include dilated cardiomyopathy, atrial
fibrillation (“A-fib”), congestive heart failure, emphysema, and complications from a stroke he
suffered in May 2022.5 Furthermore, Toney argues that his risk of experiencing another stroke is
likely to increase without long-term “physical therapy, occupational therapy, and other specialized
care” that will allow him “to regain function and independence.”6 To support these arguments,
Toney attaches a variety of medical records that confirm the seriousness of his medical conditions
and raise questions concerning the adequacy of BOP’s management of these conditions.
In light of the foregoing, the Court sets a Motion Hearing on March 16, 2023 at 1:00 p.m. in
Anchorage Courtroom 1 and ORDERS that the BOP medical provider most familiar with
Toney’s diagnoses, care, and proposed future care and treatment be present via video or telephone
and provide testimony regarding this matter. Furthermore, if Toney has an outside medical
provider familiar with his diagnoses, care, and proposed future care and treatment, the Court
welcomes this provider’s presence via video or telephone.
At the Motion Hearing, the BOP medical provider most familiar with Toney’s diagnoses, care, and
proposed future care and treatment shall also address the following questions:
1 Dkt. 68 (Motion).
2 Id. at 1, 6.
3 Dkt. 74 (USPO Memo)
4 Dkt. 75 (Opposition).
5 Dkt. 68 at 6; Dkt. 77 at 1.
6 Dkt. 68 at 7.
Case 3:18-cr-00012-TMB Document 79 Filed 02/28/23 Page 1 of 2

2
(1) Toney’s medical records indicate that his doctor believed at the time of his May 2022 stroke
that he would need to either undergo a A-fib ablation or have a pacemaker inserted into his
body. Was Toney evaluated for either of these options after his stroke? If not, why not?
Does he still need an ablation or a pacemaker, and if so, how urgent is that need? How
quickly would BOP be able to schedule Toney for one of these procedures?
(2) Was Toney evaluated for a cardioversion before his December 2022 hospitalization? If not,
why not?
(3) Is there a reason why Toney did not receive physical therapy after his stroke even though
physical therapy was recommended? Does he currently need physical therapy?
(4) What is Toney’s risk of experiencing another cardiac event if he correctly follows his
instructions to take the medications that he has been prescribed?
Furthermore, defense counsel shall address the following questions:
(1) Does Toney have an outside medical provider that has reviewed his BOP medical records
and has an opinion on his care and treatment?
(2) Does Toney have a release plan that includes a plan for medical treatment?
(3) What will early release accomplish if Toney is not taking his medications?
Entered at the direction of the Honorable Timothy M. Burgess, United States District Judge.
DATE: February 28, 2023.
Case 3:18-cr-00012-TMB Document 79 Filed 02/28/23 Page 2 of 2