US v. Ferguson: In 2004, Ferguson was convicted on multiple drug offenses and sentenced to 765 months in prison. His convictions and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal and in two 2255 proceedings, although he did receive a reduction of his sentence to 622 months due to retroactive Guideline amendments. In 2020, Ferguson submitted a request to the warden of his institution for compassionate release due to the COVID pandemic and his increased risk of death from the disease. The warden denied the request, so Fergusson filed a compassionate release motion in district court. In addition to the COVID argument, Ferguson also raised several additional arguments challenging his sentence and convictions, including ineffective of counsel claims. The district court denied the motion.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the denial of Ferguson’s motion for compassionate release. Before reaching the merits of Ferguson’s motion, the court dealt with two procedural issues. First, the court joined several other courts of appeals in concluding that it had jurisdiction under 28 USC 1291 to review the denial of Ferguson’s motion. Second, the court concluded that the compassionate release statute had no requirement that a defendant exhaust his remedies within the Bureau of Prisons with regard to every issue raised in a compassionate release motion. It is enough to request compassionate release on some ground. As to the merits, however, court concluded that compassionate release proceedings could not be used to collaterally attack a defendant’s conviction or sentence. That is because 2255 is the “exclusive remedy” for such matters. It distinguished cases like McCoy that were partially based on changed, non-retroactive law that led to reduced sentences on the basis that those defendants were not seeking the invalidation of their convictions.
No comments:
Post a Comment