United States v. Mutee Alghaffaar

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 28, 2022
Docket21-10279
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Mutee Alghaffaar (United States v. Mutee Alghaffaar) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Mutee Alghaffaar, (9th Cir. 2022).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 28 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 21-10279

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00548-WHO-1 v.

MUTEE FAREED ALGHAFFAAR, MEMORANDUM*

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California William Horsley Orrick, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 26, 2022** San Francisco, California

Before: M. MURPHY,*** GRABER, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Mutee Al-Ghaffaar appeals the district court’s denial of his motion under 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) for compassionate release. Because the parties are

* 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). *** The Honorable Michael R. Murphy, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, sitting by designation. familiar with the facts, we do not review them here. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We review a motion for compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1) for abuse

of discretion. United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021). “A district

court abuses its discretion if it fails to apply the correct legal standard or if its appli-

cation of the correct standard is ‘illogical, implausible, or without support in infer-

ences that may be drawn from facts in the record.’” United States v. Estrada, 904

F.3d 854, 862 (9th Cir. 2018) (quoting United States v. Hinkson, 585 F.3d 1247,

1251 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc)). The district court did not abuse its discretion in

determining that Al-Ghaffaar did not demonstrate “extraordinary and compelling

reasons” sufficient to justify compassionate release.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Hinkson
585 F.3d 1247 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Ernie Estrada
904 F.3d 854 (Ninth Circuit, 2018)
United States v. Patricia Aruda
993 F.3d 797 (Ninth Circuit, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Mutee Alghaffaar, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mutee-alghaffaar-ca9-2022.