United States of America v. Daniel Sullivan
This text of 2024 DNH 098 (United States of America v. Daniel Sullivan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
United States of America
v. Case No. 17-cr-119-PB-2 Opinion No. 2024 DNH 098 Daniel Sullivan
ORDER
Daniel Sullivan is serving a 168-month sentence after pleading
guilty to four counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Sullivan
seeks a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1) and U.S.S.G.
§ 1B1.13(b)(3)(c). His principal argument is that he needs to be released
now to care for his ailing mother. He also claims that he should be granted
a sentence reduction because changes in the law warrant reconsideration
of his sentence and his rehabilitative efforts justify his immediate release.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals has explained that a court may
grant a request for a sentence reduction brought by a defendant who has
exhausted administrative remedies if “(1) there are extraordinary and
compelling reasons that warrant a sentence reduction; (2) such a reduction
is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing
Commission; and (3) after considering the factors set forth in [18 U.S.C.]
§ 3553(a) to the extent they are applicable, the court finds, in its
1 discretion, that the particular circumstances of the case justify reducing
the defendant’s sentence.” United States v. D’Angelo, 110 F.4th 42, 48 (1st
Cir. 2024) (cleaned up); United States v. Ayala-Vázquez, 96 F.4th 1, 12-13
(1st Cir. 2024); United States v. Ruvalcaba, 26 F.4th 14, 18-19 (1st Cir.
2022). I determine whether these requirements have been met by bearing
in mind “the holistic context” of the defendant’s case. D’Angelo, 110 F.4th
at 48.
As a preliminary matter, I am not persuaded by the defendant’s
claim that he needs to be released now to care for his elderly mother.
Neither the defendant acting pro se nor his former appointed counsel have
presented a persuasive case that his mother, although seriously ill, is
currently incapacitated. Nor does the record demonstrate that Sullivan is
the only available caregiver for his mother. Thus, the defendant cannot
establish that his mother’s need for care qualifies as an extraordinary and
compelling circumstance warranting his release.
Nor am I persuaded by the defendant’s additional claims that his
rehabilitative efforts, and changes in the law, either alone or in
combination, amount to extraordinary and compelling circumstances.
Even if the defendant could establish extraordinary and compelling
circumstances, I would not grant his request because the § 3553(a) factors
2 continue to require the sentence I originally imposed. The defendant’s 168-
month sentence was substantially below the applicable sentencing
guideline range of 210-262 months. When I imposed that sentence, I
believed then, and I continue to believe now that it is the lowest sentence I
could impose that satisfies the purposes of the sentencing statute. The
defendant’s rehabilitative efforts, although commendable, do not alter my
view as to the appropriate sentence. Nor do any changes in the applicable
law or the health care needs of the defendant’s mother affect my analysis.
For these reasons, I deny the defendant’s motion for a sentence reduction.
Doc. 68.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Paul J. Barbadoro Paul J. Barbadoro United States District Judge
November 15, 2024
cc: Daniel Sullivan, pro se Counsel of Record U.S. Probation U.S. Marshal
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 DNH 098, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-of-america-v-daniel-sullivan-nhd-2024.