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 ...
It is a Crime to Lie to Your Insurer That Accident Happened After Policy Inception
Post number 5386
Posted on July 3, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Conviction for Fraud Affirmed Because Evidence Overwhelming
In State Of Washington v. Saleem Mumin Robinson, No. 87244-3-I, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 (June 29, 2026) Saleem Robinson was involved in an automobile collision on May 18, 2021. The other driver, Mohamed Waggeh, photographed Robinson’s documents and later reported the collision to GEICO, identifying the time as approximately 12:40 p.m.
That same day, at 6:06 p.m., more than five hours after the accident, Robinson purchased Progressive insurance for the vehicle involved in the collision.
The next morning, Robinson called Progressive to report the claim and stated that the accident occurred around 6:15 p.m. Progressive recorded that call without advising Robinson that it was being recorded. Progressive later conducted a special investigative unit investigation the claim because it was submitted shortly ...
Deprive Insurer of the Ability to Properly and Timely Investigate Claim & Recover Nothing
Posted on July 2, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5385
No Contract Claim No Bad Faith Claim
In South Alexander Development I, LLC v.Markel American Insurance Co., Civil Action No. 23-1436-JWD-SDJ, United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana (June 24, 2026) South Alexander Development I, LLC (SADI) owned and operated a solar farm in Springfield, Louisiana that allegedly sustained significant Hurricane Ida damage.
After SADI submitted a claim, MAIC ultimately paid $1,099,614.02 for undisputed physical damage plus the $210,000 income-loss policy limit. SADI later sued for breach of contract and statutory bad faith, contending MAIC failed to fully investigate and adjust the claim; MAIC sought summary judgment, arguing SADI failed to cooperate and withheld material repair-cost information.
LAW:
Louisiana insurance policies are interpreted as contracts according to their plain meaning, and the insured bears the burden ...
Deprive Insurer of the Ability to Properly and Timely Investigate Claim & Recover Nothing
Posted on July 2, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5385
No Contract Claim No Bad Faith Claim
In South Alexander Development I, LLC v.Markel American Insurance Co., Civil Action No. 23-1436-JWD-SDJ, United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana (June 24, 2026) South Alexander Development I, LLC (SADI) owned and operated a solar farm in Springfield, Louisiana that allegedly sustained significant Hurricane Ida damage.
After SADI submitted a claim, MAIC ultimately paid $1,099,614.02 for undisputed physical damage plus the $210,000 income-loss policy limit. SADI later sued for breach of contract and statutory bad faith, contending MAIC failed to fully investigate and adjust the claim; MAIC sought summary judgment, arguing SADI failed to cooperate and withheld material repair-cost information.
LAW:
Louisiana insurance policies are interpreted as contracts according to their plain meaning, and the insured bears the burden ...
