USA v. Sylvester, No. 21-30202 (5th Cir. 2022)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 21-30202 Document: 00516323732 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 21-30202 Summary Calendar May 18, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Donald Sylvester, Defendant—Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:04-CR-94-1 Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Defendant-Appellant Donald Sylvester, federal prisoner # 24064-265, appeals the denial of his motion for compassionate release, filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Sylvester contends that the district court erred in weighing the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors by failing to consider some * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 21-30202 Document: 00516323732 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/18/2022 No. 21-30202 mitigating circumstances and giving insufficient weight to others. Sylvester also claims that the district court abused its discretion by treating his motion as one brought by the Bureau of Prisons, which would implicate U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13, p.s., and its commentary.1 We review the district court’s denial of a compassionate release motion for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). Here, the court adequately considered Sylvester’s claims, and the record sufficiently supports the court’s conclusion that the § 3553(a) factors weighed against Sylvester’s release. See Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965 (2018). His disagreement with how the district court balanced the § 3553(a) factors does not merit reversal. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 1 The record does not support this claim, as the district court assumed that Sylvester established the existence of extraordinary and compelling circumstances before basing its decision on the § 3553(a) factors. 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.