USA v. Harper, No. 21-30742 (5th Cir. 2022)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 21-30742 Document: 00516552633 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/21/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 21-30742 Summary Calendar November 21, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jason W. Harper, Defendant—Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:13-CR-231-1 Before Davis, Duncan, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Jason W. Harper, federal prisoner # 16667-035, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). He argues that the district court abused its discretion in finding that he did not establish extraordinary and compelling reasons for * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 21-30742 Document: 00516552633 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/21/2022 No. 21-30742 release and in alternatively concluding that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors weighed against a sentence reduction. Harper has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in denying relief. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). His challenges to the district court’s balancing of the § 3553(a) factors are unpersuasive. See id. at 694. Furthermore, because the district court’s independent § 3553(a) analysis supports the denial of his motion, it is unnecessary to consider Harper’s arguments challenging the district court’s conclusion that he failed to show extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting relief. See United States v. Jackson, 27 F.4th 1088, 1093 n.8 (5th Cir. 2022); Ward v. United States, 11 F.4th 354, 360-62 (5th Cir. 2021). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court 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.