USA v. Rudden

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Criminal Action No. 18-cr-00508-CMA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
DANIEL B. RUDDEN,
Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COMPASSIONATE RELEASE
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Daniel B. Rudden’s Motion for
Compassionate Release Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). (Doc. # 77.) For the
following reasons, the Court denies the Motion.
I. 	BACKGROUND
Defendant was accused of orchestrating a years-long, multi-million-dollar ponzi
scheme that ultimately bilked more than 175 investors out of a total of nearly $20
Million. (Doc. # 80). He was charged with mail fraud, pled guilty, and was sentenced to
121 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release. (Doc. ## 32, 61).
Defendant now seeks early release from prison on medical grounds. (Doc. # 77).
Defendant suffers from Type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure, and he asserts that
these conditions put him at an increased risk of severe illness due to COVID-19.
Case No. 1:18-cr-00508-PAB Document 84 filed 11/02/20 USDC Colorado pg 1
of 6

2
Therefore, he asks the Court to convert the remainder of his sentence to time served or
home confinement.
As of the date of his Motion, Defendant had served approximately 14% of his
total prison sentence. (Doc. # 80, p. 1).
II. 	LEGAL STANDARD
Under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), the court may reduce a defendant’s sentence
when a reduction is (1) warranted by “extraordinary and compelling reasons” and (2)
“consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). To determine whether “extraordinary and compelling reasons
exist,” the court must consider the sentencing factors set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 3553(a),
including the “nature and circumstances of the offense,” the “history and characteristics
of the defendant,” and “the need for the sentence imposed.” 28 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The
applicable Sentencing Commission policy statement provides four circumstances that
may qualify as “extraordinary and compelling” reasons for compassionate release: (1)
the defendant has a terminal medical condition or a serious health condition that
substantially diminishes his ability to provide self-care; (2) the defendant is at least 65
years old and has served 75% of his sentence; (3) family circumstances; and (4) an
extraordinary and compelling reason other than or in combination with one of the above.
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.13(1)(A) & cmt. n.1(A)–(D) (U.S. Sentencing
Comm’n 2018).
Case No. 1:18-cr-00508-PAB Document 84 filed 11/02/20 USDC Colorado pg 2
of 6

3
III. 	ANALYSIS
The Government concedes that Defendant suffers from Type 2 diabetes and
hypertension, and that these conditions place Defendant at an increased risk of severe
illness from the virus that causes COVID-19. The Government argues, however, that
Defendant’s Motion should nevertheless be denied because (1) granting the Motion
would undermine the goals of criminal sentencing; and (2) the Bureau of Prisons is
taking appropriate steps to minimize the risk of COVID-19 to federal inmates. (Doc. # 80
pp. 4, 9-10). This Court agrees with the Government’s position.
The Court is sensitive to the risks COVID-19 poses to federal inmates,
particularly those inmates with certain underlying medical conditions. However, the law
requires that the Court consider whether granting Defendant’s Motion would be
appropriate in light of the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Those
factors include “the nature and circumstances of the offense” and “the need for the
sentence imposed . . . to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for
the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense.” See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)
(the court “may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed” unless
“after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a)” the court finds that
“extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant” the reduction). These factors weigh
heavily against granting the relief in Defendant’s Motion.
Defendant’s crime was serious, protracted, and damaging. For nearly a decade,
Defendant engaged in extensive fraud and deception that harmed more than 175
people, many of whom will never be made whole. (Doc. # 51, ¶ 14). Defendant faced a
Case No. 1:18-cr-00508-PAB Document 84 filed 11/02/20 USDC Colorado pg 3
of 6

4
possible sentence of up to twenty years in prison, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and the relevant
sentencing guidelines called for imprisonment for a period of ninety-seven to 121
months. (Doc. # 51, ¶ 93). Before issuing Defendant’s sentence, this Court took into
consideration Defendant’s history, the sentencing factors outlined in §3553(a), the
sentencing guidelines, and the mitigating information presented by Defendant. (Doc. #
57). Additionally, although Defendant’s diabetes and hypertension were diagnosed after
his sentencing hearing, (Doc. #77, p. 3, n. 3), and therefore were not discussed at the
hearing, the Court was aware of Defendant’s age at the time of sentencing, as well as
the possibility that Defendant could develop certain age-related medical conditions in
the future. In view of all this information, the Court determined that a 121-month prison
sentence was appropriate. To date, Defendant has served only a small fraction of that
sentence.
Defendant notes, however, that his age, diabetes, and hypertension put him at
an elevated risk of severe illness due to COVID-19. (Doc. # 77, p. 4). He asserts that his
confinement “prevents him from practicing the social distancing necessary to keep him
safe from contracting the [COVID-19] virus,” (Doc. # 77, p. 3), and he argues that
denying his Motion would be akin to issuing a him a “death sentence.” (Doc. 77, p. 18).
Based on this argument, the Court directed the Government to specifically
address what steps are being taken by the Bureau of Prisons to protect people like
Defendant from COVID-19. (Doc. # 79). The Government produced a statement by
John Brantley, Executive Assistant at the U.S. Penitentiary (“USP”) in Leavenworth,
Kansas, where Defendant is incarcerated. (Doc. # 90-1). According to Mr. Brantley, “the
Case No. 1:18-cr-00508-PAB Document 84 filed 11/02/20 USDC Colorado pg 4
of 6

5
Bureau has taken significant measures to protect the health of inmates in its charge,”
(Doc. # 90-1, ¶ 5), including:
• 	Modifying group gathering procedures to allow social distancing to the extent
possible (Doc. # 90-1, ¶ 5(a));
• 	Issuing “appropriate face coverings” to all staff and inmates and requiring that
face coverings be worn “in public areas when social distancing cannot be
achieved” (Doc. # 90-1, ¶ 5(b));
• 	Screening new inmates for COVID-19 and isolating those who test positive (Doc.
# 90-1, ¶ 5(c));
• 	Screening staff for signs and symptoms of COVID-19 (Doc. # 90-1, ¶ 5(c)); and
• 	Limiting contractor and volunteer access to bureau facilities and screening
contractor and volunteers for symptoms and risk factors (Doc. # 90-1, ¶ 5(d)).
In addition to these nationwide measures, USP Leavenworth has implemented training,
screening, and enhanced cleaning protocols to minimize the risk of inmate infection.
(Doc. # 90-1, ¶ 6).
In light of the enhanced safety procedures in place at USP Leavenworth, and in
view of the sentencing factors outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) the Court concludes there
are no “extraordinary and compelling” reasons to release Defendant after he has served
just 14% of his sentence. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
IV. 	CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s Motion for Compassionate Release (Doc. #
77) is DENIED.
Case No. 1:18-cr-00508-PAB Document 84 filed 11/02/20 USDC Colorado pg 5
of 6

6
DATED: November 2, 2020 	BY THE COURT:
_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge
Case No. 1:18-cr-00508-PAB Document 84 filed 11/02/20 USDC Colorado pg 6
of 6