Supreme Court Takes Up More Cases on Compassionate Release

The US Supreme Court agreed to consider what factors a judge can look at when reducing a prisoner’s sentence under compassionate release.

The justices Friday granted two cases asking whether the US Sentencing Commission has the authority to direct judges to look at changes in law when considering release.

It’s the latest in a string of cases that the justices have considered on the reach of the landmark First Step Act of 2018. The bipartisan law was aimed at reforming federal sentencing law.

In one of the cases granted Friday, Johnnie Carter was sentenced to 70 years in prison for a series of robberies in 2007. According to the trial court, the bulk of his punishment was due to mandatory minimum sentences in effect at the time he was convicted.

After the First Step Act significantly reduced the mandatory terms at issue, Carter asked for a reduced sentence under another of the act’s provisions. Often referred to as compassionate release, it allows a judge to reduce a criminal sentence in extraordinary and compelling cases.

The Sentencing Commission has since said a change in law is a relevant factor for judges to consider. But the district court ruled that it was bound by previous precedent, saying a change in law could not be considered.

The issue has split the federal courts of appeal. Because of that, the federal government agreed that the justices should settle the dispute.

The justices on May 27 took up Fernandez v. United States, in which they’ll consider whether judges can consider certain factors in determining compassionate release when those factors could also be the basis of a habeas proceeding or direct appeal.

The cases are Rutherford v. US, U.S., No. 24-820 Carter v. United States, U.S., No. 24-860.