govinfo:USCOURTS-kywd-3_13-cr-00150-0

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY 
AT LOUISVILLE 
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 3:13-CR-00150-CRS 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF 
v. 
DAVID NEAGLE DEFENDANT 
OPINION AND ORDER 
 
 This matter is before the Court on Defendant David Neagle ’s pro se Motion for 
Compassionate Release, DN 54. Because Neagle has not shown that extraordinary and compelling 
reasons warrant his release , the Court will deny Neagle’s motion , albeit without prejudice to 
refiling should extraordinary and compelling reasons that warrant an early release develop. 
BACKGROUND 
 
On March 19, 2014, Neagle pleaded guilty to five counts of transportation of child 
pornography, one count of attempt to receive child pornography, and one count of possession of 
child pornography. He was sentenced to 240 months of imprisonment . 11/24/2014 Judgment and 
Commitment Order, DN 44. Neagle appealed, and on November 2, 2015, the Court of Appeals for 
the Sixth Circuit affirmed Neagle’s sentence. Opinion, DN 51. On May 1, 2026, Neagle filed the 
instant compassionate release motion. Motion, DN 54. As grounds for his motion, Neagle states 
that he suffers from deteriorating medical conditions (multiple sclerosis and arthritis) and was 
exposed to harsher than normal conditions throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. He contends that 
these circumstances constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons that justify his release. Id. On 
May 7, 2026, the Court entered an order directing the United States to respond to Neagle’s motion 
no later than May 15, 2026 . Order, DN 55. No response was filed , however. T hus, the United 
States has not objected to Defendant’s early release and the Defendant’s motion stands unopposed. PageID #:
<pageID>
2 
 
ANALYSIS 
 
Compassionate release is an extraordinary remedy. United States v. Flenory, 841 F. App’x 
971, 972 (6th Cir. 2021) . Motions requesting such relief require a “three-step inquiry[.]” United 
States v. Elias, 984 F.3d 516, 518 (6th Cir. 2021) (quoting United States v. Jones, 980 F.3d 1098, 
1101 (6th Cir. 2020) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A))). The Court must find : (1) that 
“extraordinary and compelling reasons” warrant a sentence reduction, (2) that the reduction is 
“consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission,” and (3) that 
the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors support a reduction. United States v. 
Washington, 122 F.4th 264, 266 (6th Cir. 2024) (quoting United States v. McCall, 56 F.4th 1048, 
1054 (6th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A))). If all three requirements are 
met, “the district court ‘may reduce the term of imprisonment,’ but need not do so.” Elias, 984 
F.3d at 518 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)). 
As for the first of these requirements, the United States Sentencing Guidelines provide that 
certain types of medical conditions can comprise extraordinary and compelling reasons for a 
sentence reduction: 
. . . (b) Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons. —Extraordinary and compelling reasons 
exist under any of the following circumstances or a combination thereof: 
(1) Medical Circumstances of the Defendant.— 
 
(B) The defendant is— 
 
(i) suffering from a serious physical or medical condition, 
 
(ii) suffering from a serious functional or cognitive impairment, or 
 
(iii) experiencing deteriorating physical or mental health because of 
the aging process, that substantially diminishes the ability of the 
defendant to provide self -care within the environment of a 
correctional facility and from which he or she is not expected to 
recover. PageID #:
<pageID>
3 
 
 
(C) The defendant is suffering from a medical condition that requires long-
term or specialized medical care that is not being provided and without 
which the defendant is at risk of serious deterioration in health or death. 
 
(D) The defendant presents the following circumstances— 
 
(i) the defendant is housed at a correctional facility affected or at 
imminent risk of being affected by (I) an ongoing outbreak of 
infectious disease, or (II) an ongoing public health emergency 
declared by the appropriate federal, state, or local authority; 
 
(ii) due to personal health risk factors and custodial status, the 
defendant is at increased risk of suffering severe medical 
complications or death as a result of exposure to the ongoing 
outbreak of infectious disease or the ongoing public health 
emergency described in clause (i); and 
 
(iii) such risk cannot be adequately mitigated in a timely manner. 
 
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b) (2023). Neagle has not demonstrated that his circumstances satisfy any of 
these criteria. 
First, Neagle has not shown that his medical conditions have rendered him unable to 
provide self-care and he has not shown that the Bureau of Prisons cannot provide adequate care 
for his multiple sclerosis and arthritis. Neagle has not provided the Court with current me dical 
records that reflect the current status of his medical conditions or a prognosis. Rather, the medical 
records he submitted are over five years old. While the records show his diagnoses, they do no 
more to support an early release. They do not show that Neagle cannot presently care for himself 
or that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) cannot provide adequate care. Instead of making those 
showings, Neagle rests his Motion on his unsupported assertion that his conditions have caused 
his motor function to “drastically decline[]” to the point where he is no longer able to work for 
UNICORP Industries, a job that he has held for the past ten years. Motion, DN 54 at PageID# 276. 
Even if the Court presumes the truth of this assertion, it does not meet the requisite showing of a 
medical condition that has created extraordinary and compelling reasons that would support an PageID #:
<pageID>
4 
 
early release. U.S.S.G. 1.B1.13(b); United States v. Robertson, No. CR 5:21-111-DCR, 2026 WL 
81902, at *2 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 12, 2026) (defendant’s multiple sclerosis did not constitute 
extraordinary and compelling reason for early release where he did not establish impaired ability 
to provide self-care or that BOP’s care was inadequate). 
Next, Neagle contends that his release is warranted because his compromised immune 
system puts him at risk for contracting COVID -19. Motion, DN 54 at PageID# 276 . But this 
argument is undeveloped and therefore unpersuasive. Neagle provides no evidence to support this 
claim. To the extent that his argument rests on this bare assertion, it is unavailing. 
Finally, Neagle maintains that the conditions imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic 
should entitle him to an early release. He states that he endured “onerous lockdowns, cessation of 
family visitations, the suspension of many prison programs, and the lack of educational 
opportunities.” Motion, DN 54 at PageID# 277. All of these, he contends, justify a compassionate 
release. Id. The Court disagrees. The pandemic is not ongoing and therefore it does not provide a 
ground for Neagle’s early release. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(1)(D) (ongoing outbreaks may comprise 
extraordinary and compelling reasons for release); United States v. Sanchez, No. 1:19-CR-184-5, 
2026 WL 319045, at *3 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 6, 2026) (complaints about conditions previously endured 
during COVID-19 pandemic do not comprise extraordinary and compelling reasons for release). 
The grounds on which Neagle relies for his early release do not constitute extraordinary 
and compelling reasons that would justify it. Accordingly, Neagle’s Motion for a Reduced 
Sentence Based on Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons (DN 54) is DENIED, albeit without PageID #:
<pageID>
5 
 
prejudice to refiling should extraordinary and compelling reasons that warrant an early release 
develop. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
cc: Kyle Bumgarner, United States Attorney and 
 Counsel of Record 
June 5, 2026 PageID #:
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight