U. S. Supreme Court Happenings, Favorable Federal Circuit Opinions for the Week of August 29-September 2, 2022--

Supreme Court Happenings for the Week ending September 2, 2022 –

The Justices are in summer recess. The new term will start in October 3, 2022 with oral arguments, and their first conference on October 7, 2022.

Favorable Federal Circuit Opinions for the Week of August 29-September 2, 2022 –

3rd Circuit

United States v. Shields, (No. 19-2717)(3rd Cir. September 1, 2022)--In the four years since Congress enacted the First Step Act of 2018, the parameters of the resentencing proceedings it authorizes have evolved as courts labored to understand what the Act requires, what it permits, and what it prohibits. What has remained consistent, however, are background principles of sentencing law, including a court’s foundational obligations to allow the parties an opportunity to make arguments and to consider all nonfrivolous arguments they present. Here, Appellant Clifton Shields, appealing the District Court’s decision to reduce his sentence from 360 to 262 months’ imprisonment under the First Step Act, contends that the Court abused its discretion by failing to consider his arguments concerning intervening changes in law affecting his career-offender status and by denying him the opportunity to make other arguments in favor of a downward variance. Because the Court erred in finding that it did not have the discretion to consider these arguments, and because it denied Shields the opportunity to make his case in full, the Court vacated his reduced sentence and remanded for resentencing.

8th Circuit

United States v. Sryniawski, (No: 21-3487)(8th Cir. September 2, 2022)– When the federal cyberstalking statute - 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2261A(2)(B) - is interpreted in a way consonant with the First Amendment, the evidence was not sufficient to support defendant's conviction for cyberstalking; the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause prohibits Congress from punishing political speech intended to harass or intimidate in the broad sense of those words; for this reason, the statute cannot be applied constitutionally to a defendant who, like this defendant, directs speech on a matter of public concern to a political candidate with intent merely to trouble or annoy the candidate; the government does not maintain that the emails defendant sent contained a true threat to the candidate or his family, and its arguments that three categories of harassing speech are unprotected - speech integral to criminal conduct, defamatory speech and obscenity - are not sufficient to support the conviction given this record. For these reasons, the Court concluded that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction, and the judgment of the district court was reversed.

OTHER NEWS

First Circuit Panel Reiterates District Courts' "Broad Discretion" and "Holistic Review" When Resolving Compassionate Release Motions –

In United States v. Trenkler, No. 21-1441 (1st Cir. Aug. 29, 2022), the panel stressed and reiterated a prior ruling setting out compassionate release rules:

United States v. Ruvalcaba, 26 F.4th 14, 19 (1st Cir. 2022) convincingly set the standard for a district court reviewing a prisoner's proposed reasons for compassionate release, making it clear that district courts have the discretion to review prisoner-initiated motions by taking the holistic, any complex-of-circumstances approach we discussed earlier. Indeed, this approach makes sense. After all, it is possible that the whole may be greater than the sum of its parts, and reasons that might not do the trick on their own may combine to constitute circumstances that warrant a finding that the reasons proposed are, in the aggregate, extraordinary and compelling. This is not to say that a district court must find a certain number of extraordinary and compelling reasons. Rather, in conducting their reviews, district courts should be mindful of the holistic context of a defendant's individual case when deciding whether the defendant's circumstances satisfy the "extraordinary and compelling" standard -- "any complex of circumstances" contemplates that any number of reasons may suffice on a case-by-case basis, whether it's one, two, or ten.

This case and so many others serve as a remarkable reminder of just how many different federal prisoners can cite to so many different circumstances when seeking a sentence modification. A huge federal prison system necessarily creates a huge number of questions in the wake of the First Step Act's change to the compassionate release rules especially in light of Concepcion v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 2389 (2022) and cases like Trenkler.

Latest Bureau of Prison’s Statistics (From BOP Website):

Fair Sentencing/Retroactive Sentence Reductions 3,937 Orders Granted to date.
Elderly Offender Home Confinement 1,195 Approved to date.
Compassionate Releases/Reduction in Sentences 4,273 granted to date.

COMMENT:

Anyone who believes they may have a Taylor, Concepcion, Ruan, Bruen, Earned Time Credit problems or any other claim you believe you may have relief coming for or just want to see if we can find something should opt for a written case review.

Another slow week for favorable cases in the federal circuit courts. Probably people are leaving early for the Labor Day Weekend. There were 4 new compassionate release motions, 4 Cares Act Releases and 8 FSA Sentence Reductions granted this week. There are also several Fair Sentencing Act motions for reduction of sentence motions being granted weekly. Anyone who thinks that they may qualify for compassionate release or any other part of the First Step Act should request a Written Case Evaluation. As shown above, there are so many contexts besides Covid available for compassionate release. For the last 27 years, we have also been very successful on direct appeals, 2255 motions and 2241 Petitions, First Step Act, Compassionate Release Motions, DC Superior Court, State Post Conviction, Clemencies, Parole Packages. We also can help you with Earned Time Credits and other specialized motions.

If you are serious about fighting your case and want us to evaluate your case to see if you may have relief coming, request a Written Case Evaluation.