United States v. Rodd, No. 19-3498 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion for compassionate release under Section 603(b) of the First Step Act. Defendant was convicted of four counts of wire fraud and one count of mail fraud for defrauding investors. The court need not determine whether the district court erred in adhering to the policy statements in USSG 1B1.13, because the district court knew its discretion. The court rejected defendant's contention that the district court abused its discretion in denying his compassionate release motion, stating that the court does not require district courts to mechanically recite the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). The court held that the district court appropriately reviewed the record evidence and found defendant's case not sufficiently persuasive to warrant relief.
Court Description: [Chief Judge Smith, Author, with Melloy and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - Compassionate Release under First Step Act. Rodd appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for compassionate release, arguing the district court erred by failing to recognize its discretion to determine extraordinary and compelling reasons and abused its discretion in determining the section 3553(a) factors did not warrant compassionate release. The district court knew its discretion and did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. The district court is not required to mechanically recite the sentencing factors or make specific findings; the evidence showed that the district court was aware of the relevant factors, appropriately reviewed the record evidence, and found Rodd's case was not sufficiently persuasive to warrant relief. Disagreement with how the district court balances the section 3553(a) factors is not a sufficient ground for reversal. [ July 15, 2020 ]
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.