USA v. McArthur et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Katharine T. Buzicky, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, 316 North
Robert Street, Suite 404, St. Paul, MN 55101, for Defendant.
Christopher Lee Wuori, FCI – Terre Haute, Federal Correctional Institution,
P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute, IN 47808, pro se Defendant.
Christopher Lee Wuori is serving a 262-month sentence in the custody of the
Bureau of Prisons after pleading guilty to Conspiracy to Participate in Racketeering
Activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d). He moves for compassionate release. (Mot.
Comp. Rel., Aug. 8, 2025, Docket No. 2441.) 	Because no extraordinary and compelling
circumstances warrant release at this time, and because the sentencing factors would not
support release even if such circumstances did exist, the Court will deny the motion.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHRISTOPHER LEE WUORI,
Defendant.
Criminal No. 12-26(3) (JRT/JSM)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
DENYING MOTION FOR
COMPASSIONATE RELEASE
CASE 0:12-cr-00026-JRT-JSM Doc. 2461 Filed 04/27/26 Page 1 of 4

-2-
DISCUSSION
Many of the facts relevant to the present motion are set forth in United States v.
Wuori, Crim. No. 12-26, 2024 WL 4063478 (D. Minn. Sept. 5, 2024), in which the Court
denied Wuori’s prior motion for compassionate release.
Once a defendant has exhausted administrative remedies, 1 the Court may modify
a sentence after it considers the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) if it
finds that “extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction” and that
“such a reduction is consistent with the applicable policy statements issued by the
Sentencing Commission.” 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). One situation in which extraordinary
and compelling reasons for release may exist is when the defendant’s parent is
incapacitated and “the defendant would be the only available caregiver for the parent.”
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(3)(C). 	Wuori contends that release is appropriate because of the
recent passing of his father, which he asserts leaves him as the only family member who
can care for his aging mother, who requires constant care.
However, Wuori’s circumstances do not rise to the level of those warranting
compassionate release. 	Wuori concedes that although “no one in the family . . . is
available . . . on a consistent basis,” there are indeed “other family members are capable
of pitching in and helping with caring for [Wuori’s] mother”—albeit not full-time. (Mem.
1 The Court concludes that Wuori has satisfied the exhaustion requirement in this case.
CASE 0:12-cr-00026-JRT-JSM Doc. 2461 Filed 04/27/26 Page 2 of 4

-3-
Supp. Mot. Comp. Rel. at 13, Aug. 8, 2025, Docket No. 2442.) In 2024, the Court rejected
Wuori’s argument regarding his family circumstances by concluding that Wuori’s father
and brother, Ricky Wuori Jr., were available caregivers for Wuori’s mother. See Wuori,
2024 WL 4063478 at *3. Although Wuori’s father has now passed away, it seems that his
brother remains a possible caregiver, and accordingly Court concludes Wuori has not
shown that he is “the only available caregiver for the parent.” 	See U.S.S.G. §
1B1.13(b)(3)(C).
Wuori 	also 	argues 	that 	a 	sentence 	reduction 	is 	warranted 	under 	U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.13(b)(6), which provides that extraordinary and compelling reasons may exist “[i]f
a defendant received an unusually long sentence and has served at least 10 years of the
term of imprisonment, [and] a change in the law (other than an amendment to the
Guidelines Manual that has not been made retroactive)” would produce a “gross disparity
between the sentence being served and the sentence likely to be imposed at the time the
motion is filed.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(6). 	In 2024, the Court rejected this argument by
Wuori, see Wuori, 2024 WL 4063478, at *4, and for the reasons articulated in that
decision, the Court reaches the same conclusion here.2
Finally, the Court notes that Wuori has filed a Motion Requesting Judicial Notice,
stating that “he has now been approved for release into the RRCC/Halfway house
2 The Court further concludes, as it did in its 2024 Order, that even if the Court had found
extraordinary and compelling reasons, the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
would not support release at this time. See Wuori, 2024 WL 4063478 at *5.
CASE 0:12-cr-00026-JRT-JSM Doc. 2461 Filed 04/27/26 Page 3 of 4

-4-
placement program.” 	(Mot. Requesting Jud. Notice, at 1, Mar. 13, 2026, Docket No.
2460.) He contends that this change in status “should clear the hurdle for this Court to
consider immediate release from confinement for the exclusive purpose of allowing him
to transition to that of Primary Caregiver for his mother.” (Id. at 3.) However, because
the Court determines that Wuori has not carried his burden to demonstrate that
extraordinary and compelling circumstances relating to the need to care for his mother
warrant his immediate release, the Court will deny his request for judicial notice as moot.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. 	Defendant’s Pro Se Motion for Compassionate Release from Custody (Docket
No. [2441]) is DENIED.
2. 	Defendant’s Pro Se Motion Requesting Judicial Notice (Docket No. [2460]) is
DENIED as moot.
DATED: April 27, 2026
at Minneapolis, Minnesota. 	JOHN R. TUNHEIM
United States District Judge
CASE 0:12-cr-00026-JRT-JSM Doc. 2461 Filed 04/27/26 Page 4 of 4