DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
LENNOX PHILLIPS, 
Defendant. 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
 
) 
Case No. 3:15-cr-0043 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
ORDER 
 
BEFORE THE COURT is the pro se Letter of Lennox Phillips (“Phillips”), filed on 
December 18, 2020, which the Court construes as a motion for compassionate release or 
reduction in sentence. (ECF No. 65.) The United States (“the Government”) filed an 
opposition to the motion on February 12, 2021. (ECF No. 67.) For the reasons stated below, 
the Court will deny the motion without prejudice. 
 
On Dec. 8, 2015, the Court accepted Phillips’ plea of guilty to one count of coercion or 
enticement of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a). On August 11, 2016, the Court 
sentenced Phillips to a term of incarceration of 130 months, to be followed by a ten-year 
term of supervised release. On January 26, 2017, the Court amended the term of 
incarceration to 115 months and additionally imposed restitution as part of the judgment.  
 
On December 18, 2020, Phillips filed a Letter that the Court construes as a motion for 
compassionate release or reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). (ECF 
No. 65.) In his letter, Phillips asserts that this is his first offense and asks that the Court “take 
pitty” on him “to serve less time in prison.” Id. at 1-2.  
 
On February 12, 2021, the Government filed an opposition to Phillips’ motion. (ECF 
No. 67.) In its opposition, the Government asserts that Phillips “has not exhausted his 
administrative remedies.” Id. at 3. 
The Third Circuit has explained that, prior to a District Court considering a 
defendant’s motion for compassionate release pursuant to Section 3582, either (1) the 
Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) must have had 30 days to consider the defendant’s request that 
Case: 3:15-cr-00043-RAM-RM   Document #: 68   Filed: 02/19/21   Page 1 of 2
United States v. Phillips 
Case No. 3:15-cr-0043 
Order 
Page 2 of 2 
 
the BOP move for compassionate release on his behalf, or (2) the defendant must 
administratively exhaust an adverse decision by the BOP in response to that defendant’s 
request within that time period. See United States v. Raia, 954 F.3d 594, 597 (3d Cir. 2020). 
Failure to comply with Section 3582(c)(1)(A)’s exhaustion requirement “presents a glaring 
roadblock foreclosing compassionate release.” See id.  
Phillips does not assert that he requested the BOP to move for sentence reduction on 
his behalf and the Government argues that Phillips has not made such a request. Accordingly, 
the Court finds that Phillips has not satisfied Section 3582(c)(1)(A)’s exhaustion 
requirement. As such, the Court cannot consider the merits of Phillips’ motion. 
The premises considered, it is hereby 
ORDERED that Phillips’ motion for compassionate release or sentence reduction, ECF 
No. 65,  is DENIED without prejudice. 
 
Dated: February 19, 2021  
s/ Robert A. Molloy  
 
 
 
  
 
                                         ROBERT A. MOLLOY 
    
 
  
 
                                         District Judge 
 
 
Case: 3:15-cr-00043-RAM-RM   Document #: 68   Filed: 02/19/21   Page 2 of 2