USA v. James Rudzavice, No. 20-10536 (5th Cir. 2020)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 20-10536 Document: 00515679678 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/18/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 18, 2020 No. 20-10536 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus James L. Rudzavice, Defendant—Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:07-CR-138-1 USDC No. 4:20-CV-505 Before Wiener, Southwick, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* James Rudzavice was convicted of child pornography offenses and sentenced to 360 months in prison. United States v. Rudzavice, 586 F.3d 310, 312-13 (5th Cir. 2009). He appeals from the district court’s denial of a motion * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 20-10536 Document: 00515679678 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/18/2020 No. 20-10536 for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), in which he argued that the threat of COVID-19 in prison constituted extraordinary and compelling reasons for release. He asserts on appeal that he has already contracted COVID-19 once and fears reinfection. He also asserts that the district court was biased, and he seeks a remand for reconsideration by a different judge. We need not decide whether the risk of reinfection constitutes an extraordinary and compelling reason for compassionate release because the district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that Rudzavice remained a danger to the safety of others and that his immediate release after serving less than half of his sentence would not be in the interest of justice and would minimize the seriousness of his crimes. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 692-93 (5th Cir. 2020). The judgment is AFFIRMED. Rudzavice’s motion for appointment of counsel and all of his other requests for relief are DENIED. 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.