govinfo:USCOURTS-ohnd-4_18-cr-00717-2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 
 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 
 Plaintiff, 
 
v. 
 
DARYL EVANS, 
 
 Defendant. 
 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
 
CASE NO. 4:18-cr-00717-1 
 
ORDER 
[Resolving Doc. 136] 
 
 
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: 
 
 Defendant Daryl Evans moves  pro se for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. 
§ 3582(c)(1)(A).
1  Evans is currently serving a 183-month sentence for insurance fraud 
relating to his arson of several Warren, Ohio properties.2 
 With his motion, Evans argues that his medical conditions, including his untreated 
diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, sleep apnea, obesity, and age, in combination with his 
rehabilitation efforts, are extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying early release.  Evans 
also says that because he is a low recidivism risk, the Court should find that the 18 U.S.C. 
§ 3553(a) factors do not weigh against release.   
“Generally speaking, once a court has imposed a sentence, it does not have the 
authority to c hange or modify that sentence unless such authority is expressly granted by 
statute.”3  However, under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), a district court may reduce a 
 
1 Doc. 136.  The government opposed, Doc. 137, and Evans replied, Doc. 138.  Evans has sought post -sentencing relief 
from this Court before.  In August 2020, Evans moved for compassionate relief and relief under 18 U.S.C. § 2255.  The 
Court denied Evan’s first compassionate release motion, Doc. 111, and his motion for reconsideration, Doc. 125.  The Sixth 
Circuit subsequently affirmed the Court’s denial, Doc. 128.  The Court also denied Evans’ § 2255 motion.  Doc. 126. 
2 Doc. 85, PageID #: 546-48. 
3 United States v. Alexander, 951 F.3d 706, 707 (6th Cir. 2019); 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). 
Case: 4:18-cr-00717-JG  Doc #: 139  Filed:  03/06/24  1 of 3.  PageID #: <pageID>
Case No. 18-cr-00717-1 
GWIN, J. 
 
- 2 - 
defendant’s sentence upon a motion from the defendant if the defendant filed the motion 
thirty or more days after the defendant sent a compassionate release request to their warden.4   
 If a defendant’s compassionate releasee motion meets this exhaustion requirement, 
the court then considers three factors in deciding whether to grant the compassionate release 
motion.  First, the court must decide “whether extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant 
a sentence reduction.”
5  Second, the court must ensure that “such a reduction is consistent 
with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.”6  Finally, the court 
must consider all relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.7 
 Evans has exhausted his administrative remedies. 8  However, he has not shown  
extraordinary and compelling circumstances calling for relief. 
 Evans cites his hypertension, heart failure, sleep apnea, obesity, and age as 
extraordinary and compelling.  However, the Court noted these medical conditions of Evans 
at his sentencing.
9  Facts such as these that exist at the time of sentencing are not 
extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release.10 
 This leaves Evans’ Type 2 diabetes , which the BOP diagnosed in October 2022.  
Evans has not shown that the BOP is incapable of treating Evans’ diabetes, or other medical 
conditions.11  Evans’ medical rec ords show that when he was diagnosed, the doctor 
recommended a life-style modification and to recheck Evans’ HA1c at a later date.12  Evans 
 
4 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A); see also United States v. Alam, 960 F.3d 831, 834–35 (6th Cir. 2020). 
5 United States v. Jones, 980 F.3d 1098, 1107–08 (6th Cir. 2020) (quotation marks omitted). 
6 United States v. Elias, 984 F.3d 516, 519 (6th Cir. 2021). 
7 Id. 
8 Doc. 136-1, PageID #: 926. 
9 Doc. 82, PageID #: 522-23; Doc. 83, PageID #: 636; Doc. 85, PageID #: 548-49. 
10 United States v. Hunter, 12 F.4th 555, 570 (6th Cir. 2021). 
11 Sentencing Guidelines § 1B1. 13(b)(1), provides that extraordinary and compelling reasons exist when the defendant 
suffers from a medical condition that requires long -term or specialty medical care that is not being provided, and without 
which the defendant is at risk of serious healt h deterioration or death.  See U.S. Sent’g Guidelines Manual § 1B1.13 (U.S. 
Sent’g Comm’n 2023).   
12 Doc. 136-2, PageID #: 934.   
Case: 4:18-cr-00717-JG  Doc #: 139  Filed:  03/06/24  2 of 3.  PageID #: <pageID>
Case No. 18-cr-00717-1 
GWIN, J. 
 
- 3 - 
was given educational materials and assented to his understanding. 13  Future HA1c tests 
indicate that Evans’ levels had decreased into a lower “at-risk” range, rather than confirmed 
diabetes.14  Evans is on an  extensive medication program for his hypertension and heart 
issues.  Notes from medical provider show that Evans is an effective advocate for his medical 
issues and is not at risk of serious health deterioration.15 
Because Evans offers no extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate 
release, the Court need not consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) statutory sentencing factors. 16  
However, the Court will briefl y discuss why, even if Evans had shown extraordinary and 
compelling circumstances, the § 355(a) factors stop early release. 
 The only § 3553(a) factor that has changed since sentencing is Evan’s extensive 
rehabilitation efforts while incarcerated.  While c ommendable, these efforts are insufficient 
to overcome the severity of his crime. 
 Evans ordered three arsons of two properties . In exchange, he received $146,000 in 
insurance payments (an amount he currently owes in restitution).  Evans’ actions put Warren 
community members at risk.   
 For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendant Evans’ compassionate release 
motion. 
 IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: March 6, 2024 s/ James S. Gwin   
JAMES S. GWIN 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 
 
13 Id.  Evans debates this. 
14 Doc. 136-2, PageID #: 934, 936. 
15 Id., PageID #: 935. 
16 See United States v. Elias, 984 F.3d 516, 519 (6th Cir. 2021) (“[D]istrict courts may deny compassionate-release motions 
when any of the three prerequisites listed in § 3582(c)(1)(A) is lacking and do not need to address the others.”). 
Case: 4:18-cr-00717-JG  Doc #: 139  Filed:  03/06/24  3 of 3.  PageID #: <pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight