The opinion
USCA11 Case: 22-11361 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 1 of 6
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-11361
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JORGE BONILLA MESA,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-20661-PCH-2
____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-11361 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 2 of 6
2 Opinion of the Court 22-11361
Before BRANCH, GRANT, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Jorge Bonilla Mesa, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se,
appeals following the district court’s denial of his motion for
compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). This is
Mesa’s third motion for compassionate release.
We review a district court’s determination about a
defendant’s eligibility for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c) de
novo. United States v. Bryant, 996 F.3d 1243, 1251 (11th Cir. 2021).
We review a district court’s ruling on an eligible defendant’s
motion for compassionate release for abuse of discretion. Id.
The government moves for summary affirmance of the
district court’s order. Summary disposition is appropriate where
“the position of one of the parties is clearly right as a matter of law
so that there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of
the case, or where, as is more frequently the case, the appeal is
frivolous.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162
(5th Cir. 1969). 1
Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), a district court may reduce
a prisoner’s term of imprisonment “after considering the factors set
1 In our en banc decision in Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209
(11th Cir. 1981), we adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former
Fifth Circuit handed down before October 1, 1981.
USCA11 Case: 22-11361 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 3 of 6
22-11361 Opinion of the Court 3
forth in section 3553(a) to the extent that they are applicable, if it
finds that” (as relevant here) “extraordinary and compelling
reasons warrant such a reduction” and “that such a reduction is
consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the
Sentencing Commission.” The applicable Sentencing Commission
policy statement is set out in U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 1B1.13.
Bryant, 996 F.3d at 1248. The application notes to § 1B1.13
establish four categories of circumstances in which “extraordinary
and compelling reasons” for a sentence reduction exist:
(1) qualifying medical conditions, (2) advanced age, (3) family
circumstances, and (4) other circumstances in the defendant’s case
are determined by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to be
extraordinary and compelling. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.1. Under
the policy statement, a defendant’s medical conditions qualify as
“extraordinary and compelling reasons” for his release if he is
suffering from (1) a terminal illness, or (2) a serious physical or
medical condition, functional or cognitive impairment, or
deteriorating health due to aging, which “substantially diminishes
the ability of the defendant to provide self-care within the
environment of a correctional facility and from which he or she is
not expected to recover.” Id. cmt. n.1(A).
To grant a motion for compassionate release under
§ 3582(c)(1)(A), a district court must first find that all three of the
statutory prerequisites for relief are met: extraordinary and
compelling reasons justifying release, consistency with § 1B1.13,
and support in the § 3553(a) sentencing factors. United States v.
USCA11 Case: 22-11361 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 4 of 6
4 Opinion of the Court 22-11361
Tinker, 14 F.4th 1234, 1237 (11th Cir. 2021). Because all three
conditions are necessary, “the absence of even one would foreclose
a sentence reduction.” Id. at 1238. Here, the district court found
that none of the statutory prerequisites were met.
Now on appeal, Mesa argues that he has shown three
“extraordinary and compelling” reasons for release: his medical
condition, sentencing disparities, and his rehabilitation in prison.
For his medical condition, he claims that he has asthma, obesity,
and a missing kidney, all of which also increase his risk of
complications from Covid-19. He also asserts that prisoners
receive “minimal medical care.”
None of these three reasons are “extraordinary and
compelling” under the Guidelines. In assessing whether reasons
are “extraordinary and compelling,” district courts are limited to
the four categories of circumstances set out in the application notes
to § 1B1.13. See Bryant, 996 F.3d at 1248. Sentencing disparities
and rehabilitation may be relevant to other parts of the
compassionate release analysis, but they do not fall into one of
these categories.
That leaves Mesa’s medical conditions. Although a medical
condition may qualify as “extraordinary and compelling,” Mesa has
not shown that any of his are terminal, so debilitating that they
substantially diminish his ability to provide self-care in prison, or
that they are not manageable in prison. Nor has Mesa
substantiated his claims of inadequate medical care.
USCA11 Case: 22-11361 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 5 of 6
22-11361 Opinion of the Court 5
To the contrary, medical records reflect that Mesa’s medical
conditions have been carefully managed. Mesa has received
medical attention several times over the past few years. His visit
summaries are detailed: providers measure his vitals, thoroughly
assess his health, and refer often to his medical history. As recently
as March 2021, Mesa reported that he “[f]eels good, has no
complaints.”
Providers have also managed the specific ailments that Mesa
identifies. In April 2021, Mesa first notified his providers that he
was “born with asthma.” In response, they carefully analyzed his
breathing concerns and made recommendations, even though he
said he had not had an asthma attack since 2010. As for obesity,
providers have tracked his weight over time and more than once
discussed “healthy diet and exercise” and made “specific
recommendations” to help his conditioning. It is true that Mesa
has been missing a kidney since his childhood, but nothing suggests
that this has affected his health, including recent bloodwork. In
short, none of Mesa’s ailments—alone or together—are a
qualifying medical condition under the Guidelines. See U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.13 cmt. n.1.
Covid-19 does not change the calculus. In fact, this Court
recently rejected a prisoner’s similar argument that “the
confluence of his medical conditions and COVID-19 creates an
extraordinary and compelling reason warranting compassionate
release.” United States v. Giron, 15 F.4th 1343, 1346 (11th Cir.
2021). Besides, Mesa’s risk is otherwise low. He has been
USCA11 Case: 22-11361 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 6 of 6
6 Opinion of the Court 22-11361
vaccinated against the virus and received a booster shot, and he is
routinely tested for Covid-19.
Because Mesa failed to demonstrate an extraordinary and
compelling reason for his release, “one of the necessary conditions
for granting compassionate release was absent; therefore,
compassionate release was foreclosed.” Giron, 15 F.4th at 1350.
The district court did not abuse its discretion.
We conclude that the government’s position on appeal is
“clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial
question as to the outcome of the case,” and we therefore GRANT
the government’s motion for summary affirmance. Groendyke
Transp., Inc., 406 F.2d at 1162. The government’s motion to stay
the briefing schedule is DENIED as moot.
AFFIRMED.