The Sixth Circuit issued Friday a significant decision regarding the process and applicable factors for consideration of motions for compassionate release filed by defendants pursuant to the First Step Act in United States v. Jones.
The most important point resolved in this case is "that U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 1B1.13 is not an 'applicable' policy statement in cases where incarcerated persons file their own motions in district court for compassionate release." Section 1B1.13 has not been updated "to reflect the First Step Act," and "district courts have full discretion in the interim to determine whether an 'extraordinary and compelling' reason justifies compassionate release when an imprisoned person files a § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion."
First, "[t]he first sentence of § 1B1.13 predicates the entire policy statement on the Director of the BOP's filing a motion for compassionate release." Furthermore, the "commentary's fourth application note" grants to the BOP Director sole authority to determine the existence of extraordinary and compelling circumstances, a catch-all provision that "does not reflect the First Step Act's procedural reforms to compassionate release[.]"
Second, Congressional intent was to expand the granting of compassionate release, as "the First Step Act's main co-sponsors were displeased that a mere trickle of compassionate releases occurred under the BOP's supervision." Accordingly, "[i]t would make little sense for the courts to operate as if the BOP remains the sole gatekeeper of compassionate release, which would reflect a bygone era that Congress intentionally amended in the First Step Act."
Third, in 2016, the Sentencing Commission broadened the criteria for eligibility for compassionate release. "Thus, enforcing the as-written catch-all provision both contravenes Congress's motivation for reforming compassionate release in the First Step Act and ignores the Sentencing Commission's grounds for augmenting § 1B1.13's application notes in 2016."
And so the new rule is as follows:
In cases where incarcerated persons file motions for compassionate release, federal judges may skip step two of the § 3582(c)(1)(A) inquiry and have full discretion to define "extraordinary and compelling" without consulting the policy statement of § 1B1.13.
