USA v. Burgos

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1:20-cr-00101-MR-WCM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) O R D E R
)
KIJON CHSIRE DAMON BURGOS, )
)
Defendant. )
_______________________________ )
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant’s “Motion to
Reduce Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) and the First Step
Act/Compassionate Release” [Doc. 48].
In October 2020, the Defendant Kijon Chsire Damon Burgos was
charged in a one-count Bill of Indictment with possession of firearms and
ammunition after having been convicted of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)(1). [Doc. 1]. In December 2020, he pled guilty to this count without
the benefit of a plea agreement. [Doc. 12]. The Court determined that the
Defendant was an armed career criminal and sentenced him to 180 months’
imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). [Doc. 33]. The Defendant
appealed [Doc. 35], and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed his
conviction and sentence [Doc. 45].
Case 1:20-cr-00101-MR-WCM Document 49 Filed 05/25/23 Page 1 of 3

2
The Defendant now moves pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) for
a compassionate release, arguing that if he were sentenced today, his
sentence would be significantly lower because the armed career criminal
enhancement would no longer apply. [Doc. 48]. The Defendant, however,
is foreclosed from challenging the validity of his conviction or sentence in a
compassionate release motion.1 United States v. Ferguson, 55 F.4th 262,
270 (4th Cir. 2022) (“Because [28 U.S.C.] § 2255 is the exclusive method of
collaterally attacking a federal conviction or sentence, a criminal defendant
is foreclosed from the use of another mechanism, such as compassionate
release, to sidestep § 2255's requirements.”); United States v. Rogers, No.
4:14-0028-MGL, 2022 WL 686850, at *5 (D.S.C. Mar. 8, 2022) (holding that
a compassionate release motion is not a proper vehicle for challenge to an
armed career criminal designation).
1 Even if the Defendant could raise such an argument via a compassionate release
motion, his challenge to his armed career criminal designation is entirely without merit.
The Defendant argues that he did not receive the benefit of Amendment 798 to the
Guidelines. Amendment 798, however, was enacted in 2016; the Defendant was
sentenced in 2021 under the 2018 version of the Sentencing Guidelines. As such, he
received the benefit of all the amendments and supplements to the Guidelines that had
been previously enacted.
Case 1:20-cr-00101-MR-WCM Document 49 Filed 05/25/23 Page 2 of 3

3
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Defendant’s “Motion to
Reduce Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) and the First Step
Act/Compassionate Release” [Doc. 48] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: May 25, 2023
Case 1:20-cr-00101-MR-WCM Document 49 Filed 05/25/23 Page 3 of 3