United States of America v. Nathaniel Coleman

ALD-124 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 20-3178
___________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
NATHANIEL COLEMAN,
Appellant
____________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Criminal No. 2-12-cr-00295-001)
District Judge: Honorable Gene E. K. Pratter
____________________________________
Submitted on Appellee’s Motion for Summary Action
Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
March 18, 2021
Before: MCKEE, GREENAWAY, JR. and BIBAS, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: May 24, 2021)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
Pro se appellant Nathaniel Coleman appeals from the District Court’s order
denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). In
* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not

-- 1 of 4 --

2
2013, Coleman pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to four counts of an
indictment charging him with conspiracy to commit robbery which interferes with
interstate commerce, robbery which interferes with interstate commerce, using and
carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, and convicted felon in
possession of a firearm. The District Court imposed an aggregate prison term of 155
months. Coleman did not appeal from his judgment of sentence.
In August 2020, after his request for compassionate release was denied by the
warden, Coleman filed a pro se motion requesting compassionate release based on
“extraordinary and compelling reasons” under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Coleman
asserted that his medical conditions put him at higher risk of serious illness or death if he
were to contract COVID-19. He stated that he receives treatment for asthma, high blood
pressure and “weak heart,” and HIV; he also states that he has a “concern of cancer”
regarding a thyroid mass, for which he had been scheduled for a biopsy procedure.
Motion for Compassionate Release at 3. The Government opposed Coleman’s motion,
providing Coleman’s medical records. Coleman filed a reply.
The District Court denied Coleman’s motion for compassionate release, finding
that Coleman failed to present any extraordinary and compelling justification for
compassionate release. The District Court found that Coleman’s medical records did not
contain evidence that he has a “weak heart” or cancer. While acknowledging that the
Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has placed asthma (moderate-severe),
constitute binding precedent.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
HIV, and hypertension in the category of conditions that “might” place individuals at
increased risk of adverse outcomes from COVID-19, the District Court found that
Coleman has been managing his medical conditions well while incarcerated, and that
those conditions were not sufficiently serious to justify compassionate release. Also, the
District Court noted that, because Coleman did not present a medical ailment warranting
release, Coleman’s efforts at rehabilitation while in prison could not serve as a basis for
granting compassionate release.
Coleman filed a timely notice of appeal, as well as his opening brief. The
Government filed a motion for summary affirmance, see 3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; 3d Cir.
I.O.P. 10.6, and for permission to be relieved of its obligation to file a brief, see 3d Cir.
L.A.R. 31.2.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion
the District Court’s order denying Coleman’s motion for compassionate release. See
United States v. Pawlowski, 967 F.3d 327, 329-30 (3d Cir. 2020) (noting that a district
court “may” reduce an inmate’s sentence under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) upon finding
“extraordinary and compelling” reasons, after weighing the § 3553(a) factors). We will
take summary action if “no substantial question is presented.” 3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; I.O.P.
10.6.
Coleman argues that the District Court erred in not crediting him with having
established extraordinary and compelling circumstances based on his thyroid mass and
strong suspicion of thyroid cancer based on what he was orally informed. He also argues

-- 3 of 4 --

4
that the District Court should not have considered whether he is managing his other
conditions well while in prison, because simply having the conditions of asthma, high
blood pressure, and HIV include him in the CDC’s grouping for adults that “might be” at
increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19.
We discern no reason to disturb the District Court’s denial of Coleman’s motion
for compassionate release. Coleman may well have a well-founded concern of having
cancer. Yet as the District Court stated, Coleman points to no documented evidence that
he has cancer, or other condition known to place an adult at increased risk. We also find
no error in the District Court’s conclusion that Coleman’s conditions that “might” place
him at an increased risk, without more, are not sufficient to constitute an extraordinary
and compelling reason for purposes of § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
For these reasons, we grant the Government’s motion and will summarily affirm
the District Court’s order. The Government’s motion to be relieved of filing a brief is
granted.

-- 4 of 4 --