United States v. Troy H. Williams

Williams · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · December 12, 2025 · No. 25-3241

Summary

The Sixth Circuit affirmed the denial of Troy H. Williams’s motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). The court held that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the Bureau of Prisons was providing sufficient treatment for Williams’s thrombophilia and recurrent deep vein thrombosis, and that he had not shown an extraordinary and compelling reason for release. The court therefore did not reach all of Williams’s challenges to the § 3553(a) analysis.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Rachel S. Bloomekatz; Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge; Danny J. Boggs, Circuit Judge; Rachel S. Bloomekatz, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
December 12, 2025
Docket number
25-3241
Procedural posture
Williams appealed the denial of his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
Standard of review
The denial of compassionate release is reviewed for abuse of discretion; legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, factual findings for clear error, and the district court's § 3553(a) analysis for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
Published and recommended for publication; precedential in the Sixth Circuit subject to applicable circuit publication rules.
Parties
Troy H. Williams v. United States of America
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

post-conviction reliefsentencingstandard of reviewappellate procedurehealth law

Practice areas

criminal proceduresentencingpost-conviction reliefhealth law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by finding that Williams's alleged inadequate medical care did not constitute an extraordinary and compelling reason for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(1)(C).
  2. Whether the district court's factual findings concerning the adequacy of Williams's medical care were clearly erroneous.
  3. Whether the court needed to reach Williams's challenge to the district court's analysis of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.

Holdings

  1. A defendant relying on U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(1)(C) must show that he suffers from a medical condition requiring long-term or specialized care, is not receiving that care, and is therefore at risk of death or serious deterioration in health. Williams failed to make that showing.
  2. The district court did not clearly err in finding that FCI Coleman provided sufficient treatment and that Williams was not shown to be at risk of serious health deterioration or death.
  3. The court did not need to examine Williams's arguments concerning the § 3553(a) factors because the failure to establish extraordinary and compelling circumstances independently supported denial of compassionate release.

Key quotations

As such, Williams must show that he is (1) suffering from a medical condition necessitating long-term or specialized care; (2) not getting that care; and, therefore, (3) “at risk” of death or serious health deterioration. (p. 4)
Accordingly, Williams has not shown clear error in the district court’s factfinding. (p. 6)
So, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Williams’s motion for compassionate release on the grounds that he had not satisfied § 1B1.13(b)(1)(C) and thus not shown extraordinary and compelling circumstances. (p. 6)

Factual background

Williams pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute cocaine, possessing heroin with intent to distribute, possessing a firearm as a felon, and three money-laundering counts, receiving a 198-month sentence. He suffers from thrombophilia and recurrent deep-vein thrombosis and takes warfarin, which requires blood testing to monitor clotting and dosage. After his transfer to FCI Coleman, he alleged that blood testing, medication administration, and medical care were inadequate and placed him at risk of serious health deterioration or death. The medical records, prison clinical director's declaration, and other evidence did not establish that the care was sufficiently deficient to create the required risk.

Procedural history

Williams pleaded guilty in the district court to drug, firearm, and money-laundering offenses and received a 198-month prison sentence. Nearly a decade later, he moved for compassionate release, arguing that the Bureau of Prisons was inadequately treating his thrombophilia. The district court denied the motion, finding no extraordinary and compelling circumstances and concluding that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors would not support release. The Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…