Source: https://nacdl.org/search?term=*&activefilter=First%20Step%20Act
Timestamp: 2020-08-08 02:31:27
Document Index: 643916786

Matched Legal Cases: ['§3582', '§403', '§924', '§403', '§403', '§924', '§403', '§ 924', '§ 3624']

X First Step Act
Compassionate Release (13)
Sentencing Guidelines (8)
Brief of Amici Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and FAMM in Support of Defendant/Appellee’s Petition for Rehearing and/or Rehearing En Banc.
Argument: Appellee Raia’s Petition for Rehearing addresses the discretion of a district court to excuse the 30-day waiting period for compassionate release under the First Step Act, 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A). On April 2, 2020, the Panel declined to remand this case under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1, stating that remand would be “futile.” In so ruling, the Panel necessarily concluded that the 30-day waiting period cannot be excused or waived. That conclusion was inconsistent with both Supreme Court and Circuit precedent. The ruling creates inconsistency in the Circuit’s treatment of all claims-processing rules, and undermines courts’ equitable authority in a wide range of cases. The30-day waiting period is a nonjurisdictional claims-processing rule. Courts may excuse noncompliance with that rule absent an express prohibition on doing so. Remand is therefore not “futile.” The Panel’s sua sponte conclusion to the contrary was error. Rehearing should be granted to correct the Panel’s error and confirm that judges are empowered to address “extraordinary and compelling” circumstances even when they arise exigently. At a minimum, the Panel should grant rehearing and order full briefing on this important issue, which was neither decided below nor fully briefed on appeal.
Brief of Amici Curiae the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation, Due Process Institute, R Street Institute, and Americans for Prosperity Foundation in Support of Defendant/Cross-Appellee.
Argument: The text of §403(b) applies the sentencing amendments to §924(c) at resentencing. The text of §403(b), not the savings statute, governs application of the sentencing amendments. Background principles confirm that §403 applies at resentencing. The government’s rule serves no purpose. The government’s contrary arguments fail. Congress enacted the First Step Act to reform §924(c). In accordance with the text, context, and purpose of the First Step Act, this Court should hold that the sentencing amendments in §403 apply to sentences imposed after the First Step Act’s effective date, including at a de novo resentencing.
The First Step Act makes important changes to several federal drug and gun statutes. The Act reduces mandatory minimum enhancements for some drug defendants and also changes the definition of these enhancements. It also modifies the existing federal safety valve, broadening its application to more drug defendants; changes the “stacking” penalty under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); and retroactively applies the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010.
“Good time credit” results in real time being deducted from an inmate’s sentence and is gained by maintaining good behavior during incarceration. See 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b). All incarcerated individuals, other than those serving life sentences, are eligible for good time credit.