Opinion and Order Granting Motion to Sentence Reduction 

Argument: Leon Ford Jr. was sentenced to 483 months for four counts, including two 924(c) counts. Motion based on diabetes and other health issues, as well as amendments to 924(c). Ford was also sentenced before the decisions in Booker and Dean that affected sentencing. Sentence reduced to time served (equivalent of 24 years with good time). Court noted and was “mindful” of sentencing disparity despite government concession that health issues and COVID alone constituted extraordinary and compelling reason. “[W]hile the sentencing disparities that result from the First Step Act’s amendment to 924(c) do not necessarily constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons warranting a sentence reduction, the Court is mindful of this factor in this case.”

Motion for Compassionate Release (Dec. 21, 2020)

Gov Response in Opposition (Jan. 15, 2021)

Def's Reply (Jan. 29, 2021)

Order Granting Compassionate Release (Mar. 30, 2021)

Argument: Hybrid second look/obesity as risk factor victory for Mr. Thornton, sentenced to life at a young age for his part in a drug conspiracy and related murder. While the Order is pretty spare, this is a partial reduction win, from life down to 30 years. The “primary reason appeared to be sentencing disparities among co-defendants and the change in sentencing law from Booker” The Government also conceded E&C based on obesity and Covid.

Order

Argument: Stewart was convicted after trial of bank robbery and two counts of § 924(c) and sentenced to nearly 42 years. He had served 13 years (and, including a MDNC case, a total of 28 years) at time 3582(c)(1)(A) motion filed.

Court found following intervening changes in law to be ECR: guidelines are no longer mandatory (Booker); second 924(c) charge would carry only 5-year consecutive sentence, not 20 years; Stewart would not be a career offender today because predicate NC offense does not qualify under Simmons. Court notes it is not "correcting" a sentence; rather it is considering "changes in sentencing law—even nonretroactive ones—in assessing whether a defendant has shown extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant a reduction in his sentence." Court also notes Stewart's age (56) and Stewart's hypertension, and the rampant COVID outbreak at Ft. Dix.

Comments to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding post-Booker decisions, and specifically related to anabolic steroids. Includes testimony from and article by NACDL member Rick Collins.

NACDL President Cynthia Hujar Orr’s written statement to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding mandatory minimum sentencing in federal law and the value of case-specific discretion.

President Lisa Wayne's written statement to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding sentencing practices since the U.S. v. Booker decision.

We write to express our continued opposition to S. 3951, the PROTECT Act of 2022. In addition to creating a new five-year mandatory minimum prison sentence for possession of child pornography, the bill would make certain federal sentencing guidelines mandatory, reversing almost two decades of reform ushered in by United States v. Booker.  The bill would resurrect the failed and disproportionately severe sentencing policies of the past, with no corresponding benefit to public safety. We urge you to oppose it.

We are writing to express our strong opposition to S. 3951, the PROTECT Act of 2022. In addition to creating a new 5-year federal mandatory minimum prison sentence for possession of child pornography, the bill would overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker and make certain federal sentencing guidelines mandatory. The bill would signal a return to failed policies of the past and threaten to undo all the progress you have made together to restore discretion and proportionality to federal sentencing.

Todd Haugh, Can the CEO Learn from the Condemned? The Application of Capital Mitigation Strategies to White Collar Cases, American University Law Review 62(1) (October 2012), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2163644

Letter to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding USSC priorities in the current (2014) amendment cycle.

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

American Bar Association letter filed with the U.S. Sentencing Commission on August 15, 2005 in connection with its decision to add the privilege waiver issue to the list of tentative priorities for the 2005-2006 Sentencing Guidelines amendment cycle.

Comments submitted to the U.S. Sentencing Commission by NACDL's informal Coalition on the Privilege Waiver Amendment to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines regarding priorities in the current (2006) amendment cycle.

President Lisa Wayne's letter to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security regarding federal sentencing practices and the U.S. Sentencing Commission since the U.S. v. Booker decision.

Coalition letter to leadership of the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security regarding post-Booker and -Fanfan criminal sentencing.