USA v. Martinez, No. 20-10464 (5th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 20-10464 Document: 00515697171 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/07/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 7, 2021 No. 20-10464 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Christopher Martinez, Defendant—Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 4:96-CR-76 Before King, Smith, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* A jury convicted Christopher Martinez of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and marihuana, three counts of money laundering, and criminal forfeiture. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and criminal forfeiture of * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-10464 Document: 00515697171 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/07/2021 No. 20-10464 $770,711, and we affirmed his conviction and sentence. United States v. Martinez, 151 F.3d 384, 387−88 (5th Cir. 1998). Martinez filed a motion to reduce his sentence per the First Step Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). He contended that his extraordinary and compelling reasons for a sentence reduction are that (1) the First Step Act made changes to mandatory minimum penalties; (2) the Sentencing Guidelines were thought to be mandatory when he was sentenced in 1995; (3) he has engaged in various rehabilitative efforts; and (4) he is repentant. The district court denied the motion to reduce and a motion for reconsideration. We review for abuse of discretion a motion for compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). The district court considered the sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and sufficiently articulated reasons for denying Martinez’s motion. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693−94. It was not unreasonable for the court to place greater weight on the seriousness of Martinez’s offense, including the fact that a dangerous weapon was involved in the criminal activity, of which he was considered a leader. See id. Martinez’s arguments do not establish that the district court based its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence when it determined that the § 3553(a) factors weighed against a reduction. See id. The order denying the motion for compassionate release is AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
