United States of America v. Leslie Naki

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
LESLIE NAKI,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 22-10136
D.C. No. 1:20-cr-00054-HG-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Helen W. Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 15, 2022**
Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
Leslie Naki appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion
for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Naki contends that the district court erred in its application of U.S.S.G.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
NOV 22 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-10136
§ 1B1.13 and did not adequately consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors or Naki’s
arguments in support of release, including his medical conditions and the need to
care for his ailing mother. The record shows, however, that the district court
correctly treated § 1B1.13 as advisory. See United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797,
802 (9th Cir. 2021). Moreover, the court fully considered all of Naki’s arguments
and explained why it was not persuaded by them. See Chavez-Meza v. United
States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965 (2018).
Naki also argues that his circumstances justified compassionate release. The
district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding otherwise. See Aruda, 993
F.3d at 799. The court reasonably concluded that Naki’s health and his mother’s
health did not constitute extraordinary and compelling circumstances given Naki’s
vaccination status, the medical care he was receiving in prison, and the care that
was available to his mother. See United States v. Robertson, 895 F.3d 1206, 1213
(9th Cir. 2018) (stating that the district court abuses its discretion only if its
decision is illogical, implausible, or not supported by the record). The court also
reasonably concluded that the § 3553(a) factors did not support release due to
Naki’s criminal history, his history on supervision, and the offense conduct. See
United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1284 (9th Cir. 2021). Finally, the record
does not support Naki’s contention that the district court was biased against him.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --