UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 2:15 CR 25

)

STEVIE GREEN )

OPINION and ORDER

This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for compassionate release

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) and Section 603 of the First Step Act. (DE # 97.) For the

reasons that follow, the motion is granted.

I. BACKGROUND

In 2016, defendant was sentenced to 200 months imprisonment for his involvement

in an armed robbery. (DE # 77.) Presently, defendant’s projected release date is May 31,

2029, just shy of 6 years from now. Find an inmate, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, https://

www.bop.gov/ inmateloc/ (last visited Sept. 15, 2023). 

Defendant filed a pro se motion for a reduction in his term of imprisonment

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). (DE # 106.) Appointed counsel filed a

supplemental brief on his behalf. (DE # 107.) The Government filed a brief in opposition

(DE # 110), and defendant filed several documents to further support his initial motion

(DE ## 111, 112, 114). This matter is now ripe for ruling.

II. ANALYSIS

Generally, a court is statutorily prohibited from modifying a term of imprisonment

once imposed. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). A handful of statutory exceptions exist, however,

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00025-JTM-APR document 130 filed 09/15/23 page 1 of 6
one of which allows a court to grant a convicted defendant compassionate release if the

defendant meets certain requirements. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). The court may grant

a moving defendant’s motion for compassionate release if: (1) the defendant has complied

with the statute’s administrative exhaustion requirement; (2) “extraordinary and

compelling” reasons warrant such a reduction; (3) the court has considered the factors set

forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), as applicable; and (4) the reduction is consistent with any

applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(1)(A). In this case, there is no dispute that defendant has complied with the

relevant exhaustion requirements. The remainder of the elements are addressed below.

A. Extraordinary and Compelling Circumstances

The court is only authorized to grant defendant’s request if there exist

“extraordinary and compelling reasons” justifying his early release. Congress did not

define “extraordinary and compelling reasons” in § 3582(c)(1)(A), instead delegating this

task to the Sentencing Commission. 28 U.S.C. § 994(t). The Sentencing Commission

defines this phrase in the commentary to § 1B1.13 of the United States Sentencing

Guidelines. There, the Sentencing Commission states that an extraordinary and

compelling reason warranting a reduction in a term of imprisonment may exist where, for

example, a defendant suffers from a serious physical or medical condition that

“substantially diminishes the ability of the defendant to provide self-care within the

environment of a correctional facility and from which he or she is not expected to

recover;” or there exists some other extraordinary and compelling reason justifying a

2

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00025-JTM-APR document 130 filed 09/15/23 page 2 of 6
reduction in the defendant’s term of imprisonment. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 cmt. n.1.1

 Note 1

provides:

1. Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons.—Provided the defendant 

meets the requirements of subdivision (2) [regarding absence of danger to the 

community], extraordinary and compelling reasons exist under any of the 

circumstances set forth below:

(A) Medical Condition of the Defendant.—

(i) The defendant is suffering from a terminal illness (i.e., a serious 

and advanced illness with an end-of-life trajectory). A specific

prognosis of life expectancy (i.e., a probability of death within a

specific time period) is not required. Examples include metastatic

solid-tumor cancer, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), end-stage

organ disease, and advanced dementia.

Defendant suffers from Acute Myeloid Leukemia, a cancer of the blood and bone

marrow. He has been intermittently treated with different types of chemotherapy. He is

out of treatment options, other than palliative ones, except for an unlikely bone marrow

transplant. In this case, the Government argues that defendant’s circumstances are not

1 Section 1B1.13 has not been amended to reflect the First Step Act’s change to

§ 3582(c)(1)(A), which now permits a defendant to bring a motion for compassionate

release. United States v. Gunn, 980 F.3d 1178, at *2 (7th Cir. 2020). Accordingly, § 1B1.13

and its application notes provide useful – but not binding – guidance to courts in

determining whether a defendant has identified an extraordinary and compelling

reason for compassionate release. Id. The court will consider defendant’s motion, using

§ 1B1.13 and its application notes as a guide. 

3

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00025-JTM-APR document 130 filed 09/15/23 page 3 of 6
extraordinary because the BOP can provide adequate treatment and defendant can still

provide self-care in a prison environment. The court acknowledges these valid

considerations. However, these facts are outweighed by the fact that the prognoses in the

record range from a matter of several years, to only 6 months. (DE # 117.) As mentioned,

his only remaining hope for treatment is a bone marrow transplant which may not be

forthcoming due to lack of a proper donor. (Id.) Given all of the considerations, the court

finds that defendant’s condition presents an extraordinary and compelling reason

justifying supervised release.

B. Section 3553(a) Factors

Relevant factors set forth in Section 3553(a) also support granting compassionate

release to defendant at this time. While an armed robbery is a serious affront to the safety

and well-being of society, defendant has demonstrated the ability and willingness to

abide by the rule of law by incurring only one minor infraction in 8+ years in custody.

(DE # 117 at 21.) Adequate deterrence is still provided, and protection of the public is

ensured, by imposing home confinement on defendant for the second half of his sentence

rather than a simple release. Finally, the court finds that a 200-month total sentence which

consists of half-incarceration and half-home confinement provides just punishment while

still also providing medical treatment and end-of-life care to defendant in the most

effective manner. 

4

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00025-JTM-APR document 130 filed 09/15/23 page 4 of 6
C. Consistency with Policy Statements

The relevant Sentencing Guidelines policy statement, Section 1B1.13, provides that

the court should determine that “the defendant is not a danger to the safety of any other

person or to the community.” In this case, the court finds that the combination of

defendant’s lawful behavior and self-improvement efforts while incarcerated, combined

with the demands of defendant’s health condition and treatments, strongly suggest that

defendant will be a a low risk of danger to the general population or any person upon

release to home confinement.

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion for compassionate release (DE # 97)

is GRANTED. The related motion to compel (DE # 129) is DENIED as moot. The Bureau

of Prisons is directed to release defendant as soon as possible, following a determination

by the U.S. Probation Office of an acceptable living situation, and the arrangement of

defendant’s transportation to that place. His sentence of imprisonment is modified to

time-served. However, the remaining portion of the original term of imprisonment shall

be served as an additional term of supervised release, subject to the same terms imposed

in this court's original judgment, and with the special condition that defendant shall be

subject to home confinement during this period. Defendant shall then complete the

three-year term of supervised release imposed in the original sentence. The remaining

terms of defendant’s sentence remain unchanged. The Government shall serve a copy of

this order on the Warden at defendant’s place of incarceration, and shall file a status

5

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00025-JTM-APR document 130 filed 09/15/23 page 5 of 6
update with the court upon defendant’s release from prison, or by October 1, 2023,

whichever is earlier.

SO ORDERED.

Date: September 15, 2023

s/James T. Moody 

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00025-JTM-APR document 130 filed 09/15/23 page 6 of 6