Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Tommy James Lee HORNE, Defendant—Appellant.
Tommy James Lee Horne, federal prisoner # 10536-078, appeals the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. He contends, among other things, that the district court erred by relying on U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13, p.s., in denying his motion because § 1B1.13, p.s., and its commentary do not apply to § 3582(c)(1)(A) motions brought by prisoners.
We review the district court's denial of Horne's § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is grounded in a legal error or clearly erroneous facts. Id.
Following the denial of Horne's motion, we held that, although § 1B1.13, p.s. can be considered by a court, a district court is not bound by that section in considering a § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion brought by a prisoner. See United States v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 388, 392-93 (5th Cir. 2021). Because the district court did not have the benefit of Shkambi and appears to have relied exclusively upon § 1B1.13, p.s.,1 we conclude that the decision should be reconsidered under the applicable cases. See United States v. Cooper, 996 F.3d 283, 288 (5th Cir. 2021); see Shkambi, 993 F.3d at 393; Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693.
The denial of Horne's § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
FOOTNOTES
1. While stating that § 1B1.13, p.s. “informs” the decision, the district relied only upon that definition and did not address anything else, such as 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Thus, we conclude that § 1B1.13, p.s. was improperly applied as binding.
Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 21-40177
Decided: August 20, 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Make It a Preferred Google Search Source
Add to GoogleGet help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)