Olamide Olatayo Bello, a federal prisoner, appealed multiple orders from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. These orders included a preliminary forfeiture order, a denial of his motion for a new trial, and a denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines. Bello also appealed the district court's final order of forfeiture. However, during the appeal process, Bello explicitly abandoned his challenges to the preliminary forfeiture order, the motion for a new trial, and the dismissal of the original indictment, maintaining his appeal only regarding the final forfeiture order and the denial of his sentence reduction.
The Fifth Circuit addressed two distinct issues. First, regarding the final forfeiture order, the court held that Bello lacked standing to appeal. Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(4)(A), a preliminary order of forfeiture is a final judgment as to the defendant's rights to the forfeited property. Since Bello's interest in the property was resolved by the preliminary order entered at his sentencing, he had no remaining interest in the property when the final order was entered. The final order only determined the rights of third parties, meaning Bello had no legal stake in the final order to challenge. Second, regarding the sentence reduction, the court applied the plain language of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), which allows sentence reductions only for defendants sentenced based on a range that was subsequently lowered by the Sentencing Commission. Bello was sentenced on July 24, 2025, well after Amendment 821 took effect on November 1, 2023. Because he was sentenced after the amendment's effective date, he was not eligible for relief under the statute. The court noted that Bello did not challenge the district court's reasoning in his briefs, making summary affirmance appropriate.
The district court's denial of Bello's compassionate release motion stands, meaning he cannot receive a sentence reduction based on Amendment 821. The final forfeiture order remains effective, and Bello cannot appeal it in the Fifth Circuit. The decision reinforces the strict statutory eligibility requirements for sentence reductions under § 3582(c)(2) and clarifies that defendants lack standing to appeal final forfeiture orders once their property rights are settled by the preliminary order.