Concepcion Trumps Collington, Limits First Step Act Relief

US v. Reed: Reed was convicted in 1996 of conspiracy and distribution of more than 50 grams of crack, along with two counts of possessing a firearm in connection with a drug trafficking offense. Each of the drug counts had statutory sentences of 10 years to life, while the gun counts added 25 years of consecutive mandatory minimums. Reed was sentenced to life, as required by the then-mandatory Guidelines. In 2019, Reed sought relief under the First Step Act, which lowered the statutory ranges on the drug counts to 5-40 years. The district court agreed Reed was eligible for relief, but declined to reduce his sentence based on the severity of his conduct (which included two murders related to the drug conspiracy).

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision, but in a way that significantly limits the relief available under the First Step Act. In Collington, the Fourth Circuit held that when a defendant’s original sentence was higher than the newly-applicable statutory range given effect by the First Step Act, the district court must reduce the defendant’s sentence to at least the top of the new statutory range. That was Reed’s primary argument on appeal. Collington, however, had been undermined by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Concepcion, the court held. Although Concepcion did not involve the same kind of statutory issue as Collington, the court concluded that its observation that “the First Step Act does not compel courts to exercise their discretion to reduce any sentence” based on the defendant’s arguments conflicted with and superseded Collington. However, on this record, the court could not be certain that the district court had adequately considered Reed’s argument to reduce his sentence to reflect the new statutory limits and remanded for further proceedings.