United States v. Narvaez

Case: 25-20039 Document: 98-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/26/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED August 26, 2026 No. 25-20039 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Francisco Javier Narvaez, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:90-CR-428-2 ______________________________ Before King, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:* Francisco Javier Narvaez, federal prisoner # 83442-020, appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release. He contends that the district court failed to read his current motion, given misstatements in the order about the issues raised, and failed to conduct a contemporaneous review of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, as the court cited solely to the circumstances surrounding his offense, Case: 25-20039 Document: 98-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/26/2026

No. 25-20039 incorrectly stated that Narvaez did not address the § 3553(a) factors, and failed to reference any of his cited favorable post-sentencing conduct.

We review for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693-94 (5th Cir. 2020). The district court’s identification of the issues raised reflects that it properly considered Narvaez’s most recent compassionate release motion. The ruling also reflects a contemporaneous assessment of the § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Henderson, 636 F.3d 713, 718 (5th Cir. 2011). The district court was not required to analyze every factor set forth in § 3553(a) to explain its discretionary denial of the motion.

See United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir. 2006). Narvaez’s disagreement with the district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors does not show an abuse of discretion. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 694.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.