Sentence Modification – Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Eural Black

Case No.: 20-2314

Officials: RIPPLE, HAMILTON, and KIRSCH, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sentence Modification – Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons

Appellant Eural Black is serving a forty-year sentence in federal prison for firearm, robbery, and drug offenses that he committed as a Chicago police officer. He moved the district court for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3852(c)(1)(A) based on his prostate cancer and the COVID-19 pandemic. The district court denied Black’s motion. It concluded that Black had not shown “extraordinary and compelling reasons,” as defined by the Sentencing Commission’s policy statements, to modify his sentence. The court also said that even if Black had made that showing, the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) weighed against release because Black had served only one-third of his lengthy sentence for such serious crimes.

After the district court denied Black’s motion, we decided United States v. Gunn, 980 F.3d 1178 (7th Cir. 2020), which held that the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” issue was, in the wake of the First Step Act of 2018, no longer governed by the Sentencing Commission’s policy statements that the district court had relied upon here. The district court’s alternative rationale—that the § 3553(a) factors weighed against release—is not a persuasive basis for treating the legal error as harmless. Two unusual features of this case persuade us that the district court needs to take a fresh look at how those factors apply to Black. We vacate the denial and remand for reassessment of both steps of the compassionate-release decision.

Vacated and remanded

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.