Compassionate Release Not Available to Convict Only Because he is Fat & Diabetic
Barry Zalma
Mar 11, 2024
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gRYGHRXX and se the full video at https://lnkd.in/gefZ6mej and at https://lnkd.in/gHd7_5F3 and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4750 posts.
ARSON-FOR-PROFIT IS A VIOLENT CRIME OF THE FIRST ORDER
Post 4752
Of the hundreds of different kinds of insurance fraud the most violent and dangerous is an arson for profit. People, including firefighters, die or are seriously injured in the fires. Daryl Evans was caught, tried and convicted of the crimes and is now serving an 183-month sentence for insurance fraud relating to his arson of several Warren, Ohio properties.
Evans moved the USDC in the Northern District of Ohio, pro se, for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). In United States Of America v. Daryl Evans, No. 4:18-cr-00717-1, United States District Court, N.D. Ohio (March 6, 2024) the judge determined Evans was not a candidate for compassion.
Evans argued that his medical conditions, including his untreated diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, sleep apnea, obesity, and age, in combination with his rehabilitation efforts, were extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying early release.
ANALYSIS
Generally speaking, once a court has imposed a sentence it does not have the authority to change or modify that sentence unless such authority is expressly granted by statute. However, under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), a district court may reduce a 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.
If a defendant’s compassionate release motion meets this exhaustion requirement, the court then considers three factors in deciding whether to grant the compassionate release motion.
The court must decide whether extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant a sentence reduction.
Second, the court must ensure that such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.
Finally, the court must consider all relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.
Evans exhausted his administrative remedies but did not show the extraordinary and compelling circumstances needed 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 existed at his sentencing. Facts that exist at the time of sentencing are not extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release.
Evans’ Type 2 diabetes, which the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) diagnosed in October 2022, and which the BOP is capable of treating Evans’ diabetes, or other medical conditions. Evans’ medical records showed the court that when he was diagnosed, the doctor recommended a life-style modification and to recheck Evans’ HA1c at a later date. Evans was given educational materials and assented to his understanding and his condition improved.
Because Evans offered no extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release the Court briefly discussed why, even if Evans had shown extraordinary and compelling circumstances, § 355(a) factors stop early release. While Evan’s extensive rehabilitation efforts while incarcerated are commendable, these efforts are insufficient to overcome the severity of his crimes. In fact, Evans ordered three arsons of two properties, which put Warren community members at risk of death or serious injury. In exchange, he received $146,000 in insurance payments (an amount he currently owes in restitution). His petition was refused.
ZALMA OPINION
I have personally investigated several arson fires and advised insurers with regard to many more. Arson-for-Profit is the most vicious and reprehensible variety of insurance fraud. People die in those fires – sometimes the arsonist – including neighbors, tenants, police and firefighters. His sentence was appropriate and its a shame that the USA must pay to feed, house and medically treat Mr. Evans. The punishment is appropriate and he is one of the least likely prisoner in the federal system entitled to compassion.
(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/publish/post/107007808
Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01
Go to X @bzalma; Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg.
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gcZKhG6g
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://lnkd.in/g8azKc34; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH;
Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH
Arsonist Tried To Represent Himself, Failed, and Sought Habeas Relief
Post number 5357
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/he-who-acts-his-own-lawyer-has-idiot-client-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-d4bwc, See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Karacson’s Arson for Profit Attempt Required Skill & Experience to Succeed
In Steve Ellis Karacson v. David Shaver, Warden, No. 25-1089, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (May 20, 2026) Steve Karacson was convicted in Michigan state court of arson and insurance fraud after evidence showed he burned his own insured home. Investigators found multiple points of origin, gasoline odor, and evidence tying him to the scene, including cell-phone location data and a receipt showing he had purchased a gas can and gloves shortly before the fire.
FACTS
Karacson initially had appointed counsel, but his relationships with both appointed attorneys ...
Foolish to Repeatedly Disobey Court Orders
All That Remains For Trial Is Plaintiff’s Damages On Each Of These Claims And Establishing Proximate Causation Of Those Damages.
Post number 5348
See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus 5300 posts.
In Linh Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company, No. C24-0447-JCC, United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle (May 1, 2026) John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge, found that throughout this case, culminating with its briefing on Plaintiff’s renewed motion and that Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to unnecessary motion practice for clearly discoverable information and made dubious representations (including to the Court).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves an underinsured/uninsured motorist insurance bad faith claim arising from a 2017 motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff, Linh Wang, alleges that Esurance Insurance ...
The Right to Negotiate with Insurer is Not an Assignment of Claims
Post number 5347
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ambiguous-contract-repair-assignment-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2xppc, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v79is1s-ambiguous-contract-to-repair-not-an-assignment.html and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Nebraska Requires an Actual Assignment to Allow Contractor to Sue Insurer
In Millard Gutter Company, a corporation doing business as Millard Roofing and Gutter v. Farmers Mutual Insurance Company of Nebraska, also known as Farmers Mutual Insurance, also known as Farmers Mutual, No. A-24-818, Court of Appeals of Nebraska (May 5, 2026) Millard sued Farmers as an assignee of Jane Anzalone who had hired Millard Gutter to repair the roof of her home and agreed to allow Millard Gutter to coordinate with her insurer, Farmers Mutual, concerning reimbursement for repairs authorized under her insurance policy.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In ...
Qui Tam Case Without Evidence to Prove Fraud Fails
Post number 5369
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/qui-tam-insurer-contended-defrauded-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-pgfgc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5550 posts.
In People Of The State Of California Ex Rel. Heath & Yuen, APC v. Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC et al., B342847, California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division (June 5, 2026) Heath & Yuen, APC defended parties in an automobile collision case involving a McLaren and a tour van. After that case settled for $25,000, the firm filed a qui tam action under California’s Insurance Frauds Prevention Act (IFPA) against Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC, X-Law Group, PC, and Filippo Marchino. The firm alleged three fraudulent acts in the underlying litigation:
1. the complaint falsely stated the McLaren was making a “legal turn,”
2. respondents produced a fraudulent repair bill/estimate, and
3. respondents failed to disclose Marchino’s GEICO insurance and its payment for repairs....
Full Faith and Credit Act Controlled
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/evHXiiFE and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5368
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Prime Insurance Company, Inc. v. Medicab Transportation, LLC, Jason Rhodes, and Dale Johnson v. Prime Insurance Company, Inc and Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. No. 2:24-cv-421-SPC-KRH, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division (June 3, 2026) Medicab, a paratransit company, bought two policies in 2021: a Business Auto Policy from PPCI and a Commercial Liability Policy from Prime. Both policies, as originally written, appeared to cover injuries arising from loading and unloading patients from Medicab vans.
After a patient, Margaret St. Aubin, fell while being unloaded from a van and suffered injuries, her Estate made a $1 million demand. Prime and its claims administrator concluded that the Commercial Policy’s loading/unloading language had been included by mutual mistake, because...
Full Faith and Credit Act Controlled
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/evHXiiFE and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5368
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Prime Insurance Company, Inc. v. Medicab Transportation, LLC, Jason Rhodes, and Dale Johnson v. Prime Insurance Company, Inc and Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. No. 2:24-cv-421-SPC-KRH, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division (June 3, 2026) Medicab, a paratransit company, bought two policies in 2021: a Business Auto Policy from PPCI and a Commercial Liability Policy from Prime. Both policies, as originally written, appeared to cover injuries arising from loading and unloading patients from Medicab vans.
After a patient, Margaret St. Aubin, fell while being unloaded from a van and suffered injuries, her Estate made a $1 million demand. Prime and its claims administrator concluded that the Commercial Policy’s loading/unloading language had been included by mutual mistake, because...
