USA V. LESLIE NAKI, No. 22-10136 (9th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 22 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 22-10136 D.C. No. 1:20-cr-00054-HG-1 v. MEMORANDUM* LESLIE NAKI, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Helen W. Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 15, 2022** Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges. Leslie Naki appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Naki contends that the district court erred in its application of U.S.S.G. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). § 1B1.13 and did not adequately consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors or Naki’s arguments in support of release, including his medical conditions and the need to care for his ailing mother. The record shows, however, that the district court correctly treated § 1B1.13 as advisory. See United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2021). Moreover, the court fully considered all of Naki’s arguments and explained why it was not persuaded by them. See Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965 (2018). Naki also argues that his circumstances justified compassionate release. The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding otherwise. See Aruda, 993 F.3d at 799. The court reasonably concluded that Naki’s health and his mother’s health did not constitute extraordinary and compelling circumstances given Naki’s vaccination status, the medical care he was receiving in prison, and the care that was available to his mother. See United States v. Robertson, 895 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2018) (stating that the district court abuses its discretion only if its decision is illogical, implausible, or not supported by the record). The court also reasonably concluded that the § 3553(a) factors did not support release due to Naki’s criminal history, his history on supervision, and the offense conduct. See United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1284 (9th Cir. 2021). Finally, the record does not support Naki’s contention that the district court was biased against him. AFFIRMED. 2 22-10136
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.
