COVID-19 and the reimaging of compassionate release.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to provide a historical overview of compassionate release policies in the USA and describe how these policies have been used during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors then describe how these programs have been shaped by COVID-19 and could be reimagined to address the structural conditions that make prisons potentially life limiting for older adults and those with chronic illness. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This paper is primarily descriptive, offering an overview of the history of compassionate release policies before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors augmented this description by surveying state Departments of Corrections about their utilization of compassionate release during 2019 and 2020. The findings from this survey were combined with data collected via Freedom of Information Act Requests sent to state Departments of Corrections about the same topic. FINDINGS: The findings demonstrate that while the US federal prison system saw a multifold increase in the number of individuals released under compassionate release policies in 2020 compared to 2019, most US states had modest change, with many states maintaining the same number, or even fewer, releases in 2020 compared with 2019. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This paper provides both new data and new insight into compassionate release utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic and offers new possibilities for how compassionate release might be considered in the future.

The United States Sentencing Commission, Compassionate Release, and Judicial Discretion: The 2022–2023 Amendment Cycle

The Sentencing Commission is meeting for the first time in three years to promulgate guideline amendments. This amendment cycle promises to be among the Commission's most consequential. Among its tasks, the agency must update USSG 1B1.13, the policy statement that governs reduction of sentence for "extraordinary and compelling reasons.” So-called "compassionate release” has taken on new significance since Congress amended the authorizing statute in the First Step Act of 2018. Because the Commission had no quorum at the time and for several years after it has been unable to amend the guideline to conform to changes made by the FSA. Creative litigation has transformed compassionate release from the last resort for incarcerated people who were aging, debilitated, or dying to one used for a variety of situations deemed extraordinary and compelling by federal courts. These include grants based on reasons ranging from vulnerability to COVID all the way to the injustice of continued incarceration of people serving sentences the FSA lowered but did not make retroactive. Confronting the Commission is the question of whether and to what extent it might cabin the discretion judges have been exercising to recognize various grounds for compassionate release, including intervening changes in the law that make the sentence inequitable.In this article, the author traces the history of compassionate release, discusses the transformation of its use since passage of the FSA, explores the various proposals the Commission has presented for comment, and presents the choices through the lens of one incarcerated person's experience.

The Compassionate Release Clearinghouse, COVID-19, and the Future of Criminal Justice

The majority were elderly and suffered from underlying medical conditions recognized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as risk factors. Congress divided responsibility among three actors: * To the US Sentencing Commission (USSC or Sentencing Commission), it gave the job of defining what constitute extraordinary and compelling reasons (such as terminal illness or advanced age) and providing guidance to courts considering compassionate release motions. 28 U.S.C. 994(t). * The BOP was to identify prisoners who met the criteria and file reduction in sentence motions in the sentencing court. 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). * Finally, the court would decide whether to reduce the sentence after considering the factors in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), and if it found that "extraordinary and compelling reasons" warrant a reduction. 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). [...]prisoners had no right to appeal an adverse BOP decision to the court. The court is in a unique position to determine whether the circumstances warrant a reduction (and, if so, the amount of reduction), after considering the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) and the criteria set forth in this policy statement, such as the defendant's medical condition, the defendant's family circumstances, and whether the defendant is a danger to the safety of any other person or to the community.