UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GERNY JESÚS NÚÑEZ RAMÍREZ (2025)

ORDER

Defendant Gerny Jesús Núñez-Ramírez's Motion for Compassionate Release (Docket No. 190) is DENIED.

Núñez has failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to bring his motion. Defendant bears the burden of showing that he exhausted administrative remedies; merely asserting that he made the necessary request to the warden is insufficient without additional proof, such as documentary evidence. See, e.g., United States v. Van Sickle, No. CR18-0250JLR, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80854, at *10 (W.D. Wa. May 7, 2020) (“Mr. Van Sickle submits nothing more than his say so to demonstrate his exhaustion of administrative remedies ․ [his] word, without more, is insufficient to meet his burden here.”). Núñez does not even assert he exhausted administrative remedies, much less provide the Court with any documentation evidencing if a request was made. Accordingly, the Court finds that Núñez has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and on that issue alone, his request for compassionate release may be denied.

In any event, even if he had exhausted his administrative remedies, Núñez has not set forth any extraordinary or compelling reason to grant him the immediate compassionate release he requests. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Defendant indicates that “the combination of factors including his post-incarceration rehabilitation and conduct, along with the disparity in sentence, the unusually long sentence [sic] the changes in law that would affect the sentence received by a similarly situated today ․ should be considered extraordinary and compelling under the ‘other reasons’ guideline for relief.” (Docket No. 190 at p. 5.) First, Nuñez was already sentenced to less than his applicable guideline range. According to the Presentence Investigation Report, his guideline range for offense level 37 was 210-262, and Núñez was sentenced to 150 months. (Docket NO. 120 at pp. 9, 14.) Accordingly, he was sentenced to less than the guideline range, and any change in law would not result in a different sentence today.¹ Second, there is no disparity in sentencing with his co-defendants because all but one were sentenced to 150 months of incarceration. See Docket Nos. 149, 151, 175. That only leaves his claims of rehabilitation but “rehabilitation of the defendant is not, by itself, an extraordinary and compelling reason.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(d). Accordingly, Núñez's motion for compassionate release is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

San Juan, Puerto Rico, December 22, 2025.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Núñez would receive the same sentence even if he would be eligible for Amendment 821, which the Court has already determined he is not. See Docket No. 191. If Amendment 821 applied to him, his offense level would lower to 35 and his guideline range would be 168-210 months.

FRANCISCO A. BESOSA SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE