Compassionate Release 2025: Who Qualifies, 924(c) & What’s Next

7 Min. Read

If you or a loved one is serving a federal sentence and something serious has changed — health, family care, age-related decline, or an unusually long sentence under today’s standards — compassionate release may be an option. This guide explains who might qualify, the exact steps to start now, and how two Supreme Court cases shape the landscape in 2025.

TL;DR

• What it is: Judges can reduce a federal sentence for “extraordinary and compelling reasons.” You must ask the warden first and either get a denial or wait 30 days before filing in court.

• What has changed: The U.S. Sentencing Commission (2023) updated the policy to cover more situations (e.g., certain long/inequitable sentences, abuse in custody). Some courts embrace this; others are limiting parts of it.

• 924(c) stacking: In Hewitt (2025) the Supreme Court said the First Step Act’s lighter 924(c) terms apply at resentencing if the old sentence was vacated. That’s distinct from compassionate release but can be a second path to relief.

• What’s next: On November 12, 2025, the Supreme Court will hear Fernandez, Carter, and Rutherford to determine if Courts are bound by the updated 2023 Sentencing Commission policies, particularly as it pertains to 924(c) disparities. To protect yourself, you should still start your warden request now.

What is Compassionate Release?

Compassionate release is a legal tool that allows a federal judge to reduce a sentence when “extraordinary and compelling reasons” make continued imprisonment unjust. It isn’t a reward for good conduct or a loophole; it’s designed as a safety valve for the rare situations where mercy and fairness demand a second look. Judges deciding these motions don’t just ask whether someone is ill or elderly — they must weigh the person’s circumstances against public safety and the same sentencing factors used at the original hearing.

This process is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), which sets out the statutory framework for when and how a federal sentence may be reduced.

Over the past few years, this area of law has been reshaped and will continue to be in the coming months. Congress, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and the Supreme Court have all updated the rules and guidance on who may qualify and how courts should evaluate these requests.

What Laws Have Recently Changed Regarding Compassionate Release?

1.Inmate-Initiated Motions (First Step Act 2018):

Before 2018, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) was the only gatekeeper. If the BOP Director didn’t file a motion, a judge never even saw the case — which is why compassionate release was granted only a handful of times each year. The First Step Act of 2018 changed that dynamic: now, an incarcerated person (or their lawyer) may file directly in the sentencing court after taking the required step with the warden.

Why it matters: This reform turned compassionate release from a “needle-in-a-haystack” option into a real, court-accessible pathway. Thousands of motions have been filed since, compared to dozens per year before. It’s the single most important change that made compassionate release something families can actually pursue.

2. Administrative Exhaustion and Deadlines:

Even with the First Step Act, the law requires a pre-filing step. A request must first be submitted to the warden of the facility, and the inmate must then either (a) wait 30 days from the warden’s receipt with no decision, or (b) pursue and exhaust the BOP’s internal appeal process if the request is denied. Courts often refer to this 30-day waiting period as the “magic threshold” — a shorthand for the statutory requirement in 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).

Why it matters: Missing this step almost always leads to dismissal for “failure to exhaust administrative remedies.” For families, this means the clock starts with the warden’s date-stamp, and keeping copies of the request is critical.

3. Expanded Scope of "Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons":

The four main categories leading to compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) were expanded under the U.S Sentencing Commission’s 2023 Amendments.

The First Step Act gave federal judges broad authority to interpret what qualifies as "extraordinary and compelling". Because the Sentencing Commission's policy statement was not immediately updated after 2018, many courts treated the old, narrow definitions as advisory for inmate-filed motions. However, in November of 2023, The U.S. Sentencing Commission's 2023 Amendments formally updated and expanded the policy guidelines for compassionate release. This update formally acknowledged the reality of inmate-filed motions and affirmed that courts could determine "extraordinary and compelling reasons," aligning the guidelines with the First Step Act. The new guidance also expanded the list of specific categories that qualify.

The expanded qualification categories now include:

1. Being a victim of sexual assault or serious abuse in prison

2. In some cases, grossly inequitable sentences resulting from changes in sentencing law (such as the "stacked" § 924(c) sentences discussed below).

3. Clarified other definitions and made the policy statement more comprehensive.

Why it matters: The 2023 amendments offer new, explicit pathways to relief, reinforce the ability to bypass BOP inaction by going directly to court, and provide a clearer, more consistent legal framework for their application. This makes the process more accessible and potentially more successful for deserving cases than under previous, more restrictive interpretations.

4. Clarification of § 924(c) "Stacking" (First Step Act & Hewitt v. United States):

The practice of "stacking" involved prosecutors bringing multiple § 924(c) charges within the same indictment, which would trigger severe mandatory minimum penalties, even for first-time offenders who had no prior criminal record. The Supreme Court's decision in Deal v. United States (1993) interpreted the law to require enhanced penalties for each §924(c) count beyond the first, even if those convictions occurred in the same criminal prosecution. Under this system, the sentences would be 5 years for the first §924(c) count, and 25 years for each "second or subsequent" count, running consecutively to any other term of imprisonment. The First Step Act curbed this practice in 2018; however, unfortunately, the changes did not apply retroactively to people already sentenced.

The 924(c) “Stacking” 2025 Update

In June 2025, the Supreme Court clarified an important point in Hewitt v. United States: if a person’s old stacked 924(c) sentence has been vacated (set aside for any valid reason) and they face resentencing, the judge must apply the lighter First Step Act penalties.

To review, before 2018, “stacking” meant a first-time offender could receive 5 years for the first 924(c) count and 25 years for each additional count — even if all the charges came from the same case. That practice often stretched sentences into multiple decades. Congress put a stop to it with the First Step Act, but the changes weren’t retroactive for people already sentenced. Hewitt now ensures that anyone resentenced after a vacatur will be sentenced under today’s fairer rules.

This path is separate from compassionate release, but the two often work hand in hand. People serving extremely long sentences from pre-2018 stacking may have a stronger chance if resentencing is possible — and they can also pursue compassionate release with strong evidence of extraordinary circumstances.

Why it matters: Families should know that if vacatur and resentencing are options, the court must use the updated law. That can mean a dramatically shorter sentence for people still serving stacked time.

What to do if 924(c) is in your loved one’s case: Speak with legal counsel, like us at Adam Rodrigues Law, about pursuing two strategies at once — (1) a resentencing approach if a vacatur is possible, and (2) a compassionate-release motion based on health, caregiving needs, age, abuse, or an unusually long sentence, backed by a strong reentry plan.

Attorney Insight:

“If you or somebody you know was given a life sentence for drugs in federal court, that's a decent first step in the door for compassionate release and I’d like to hear from you.”

What Qualifies as "Extraordinary and Compelling Reasons" After New Law Changes?

The term "extraordinary and compelling reasons" is the central requirement, and federal judges now have more broad authority and discretion to interpret what this means for each individual case. Neither the law itself nor Congress provides a precise definition, instead delegating the task to the U.S. Sentencing Commission to offer examples, but the Sentencing Commission's updated policy (effective November 2023) further clarifies and expands these categories.

The main categories for “extraordinary and compelling reasons” now include, but not limited to:

• Medical Reasons:

      ◦ Terminal Illness: This is the clearest category. If an inmate has a serious, incurable disease with a limited life expectancy (e.g., late-stage cancer with only months to live), it’s generally considered extraordinary and compelling.

      ◦ Serious Medical or Mental Health Conditions: Conditions that are not necessarily terminal but substantially diminish an inmate’s ability to care for themselves in prison and from which they are not expected to recover. Examples include advanced progressive illnesses (like ALS), advanced dementia, severe cognitive impairment, or debilitating injuries that cannot be adequately managed in a prison setting.

• Age and Deterioration: Elderly inmates (typically age 65 or older) who have served a significant portion of their sentence (e.g., 10 years or 75%) and are experiencing serious health decline due to aging.

• Family Circumstances: Urgent and dire family needs, such as:

      ◦ The death or severe incapacitation of the only caregiver for the inmate's minor child(ren).

      ◦ The incapacitation of the inmate’s spouse or registered partner if the inmate is the only available caregiver for that partner.

• "Other" Extraordinary Circumstances : This is a flexible category that courts can interpret broadly. The Sentencing Commission's 2023 updates expanded this to include:

      ◦ If an inmate is serving a sentence that is dramatically longer than what would be imposed under current law for the same offense. This often applies to those affected by "stacked" gun charges (see below).

      ◦ Being a victim of sexual assault or other serious abuse by correctional officers in prison.

      ◦ In some cases, youthful offender considerations (if the inmate was under 18 at the time of the offense).

| Key point: The bar is high. Ordinary prison hardships, wanting to see family, or common, well-managed health issues are generally not enough. Also, rehabilitation alone (good conduct in prison) is not considered an "extraordinary and compelling reason," though it can strengthen a motion.

The Current Process of Requesting Compassionate Release

The process for filing for compassionate release involves both administrative steps with the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and a legal proceeding in federal court. This process was significantly expanded by the First Step Act of 2018, which now allows inmates to file motions directly with the court after exhausting administrative remedies with the BOP.

This is a step-by-step process to start your compassionate release process without delays:

1. Request to the Warden: You (or someone on your behalf) must first write to the warden of your facility, clearly stating the "extraordinary and compelling reasons" and providing supporting documents (medical records, death certificates, etc.).

2. Wait 30 Days: You must either receive a formal denial from the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) or wait 30 days from the date the warden received your request without a decision. Once this condition is met, you can file in federal court. This step is mandatory.

3. File Motion in Court: A motion is filed with the federal court that originally sentenced the inmate. This should outline the reasons for release and include a proposed release plan (where the inmate will live, receive care, etc.). You can file on your own (pro se), but legal counsel is highly recommended.

4. Government Response: Federal prosecutors (the U.S. Attorney’s Office) will typically file an opposition, arguing against release.

5. Court Decision: The judge (usually the original sentencing judge) will review everything. They must determine if "extraordinary and compelling reasons" exist AND if reducing the sentence is appropriate after considering other factors, especially public safety and the seriousness of the original crime.

6. Outcome: If granted, the sentence is typically reduced to "time served" with a period of supervised release. If denied, the inmate remains in prison. Appeals are possible but often difficult due to the judge's broad discretion.

| Need‑to‑Know: Appeals can take 18 months or more from start to finish, especially if extensions or complex legal issues are involved.

What Comes Next for Compassionate Release?

As of September 2025, one of the biggest questions hanging over compassionate release is waiting at the Supreme Court. The case is Joe Fernandez v. United States (No. 24-556), and the decision could reshape how judges handle these motions moving forward.

The US Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments for the case of Joe Fernandez v. United States case No. 24-556 is scheduled for November 12, 2025.

What’s this case about?
Joe Fernandez is serving a mandatory life sentence. A district judge once reduced his sentence, partly because the judge felt “a certain disquiet” about the verdict—that keeping Fernandez in prison for life would be unjust. But the appeals court reversed, saying judges cannot consider fairness concerns like that under compassionate release. According to them, those issues belong only in a separate habeas petition (a formal challenge to the conviction).

The Supreme Court needs to decide whether compassionate release judges are allowed to consider concerns like fairness, unjust outcomes, or even possible innocence as part of the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” standard in 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A).

If the Supreme Court rules in Fernandez’s favor, compassionate release could become much broader and more flexible. Judges would have the green light to weigh not just health or family emergencies, but also:

• Fairness of the original sentence. If a punishment feels wildly out of step with today’s standards, that could count.

• Potential innocence concerns. Even if there’s no legal error that would undo the conviction, a judge could acknowledge lingering doubts when deciding whether mercy is appropriate.

• Individualized review. Judges would look at the “whole picture” of a person’s life and sentence, not just narrow categories.

What this would mean in practice:

• Compassionate release would become a true safety valve—a way to fix cases that are technically “final” but feel deeply unjust.

• It would not erase a conviction (that’s what habeas is for). Instead, it could shorten or end a prison term without disturbing the judgment of guilt.

• More families could realistically qualify, especially in cases where a judge believes a sentence is too extreme but current law blocks other relief.

Client Success Story

“I recently helped a client who was given a life sentence for drugs in Federal court.

I was able to reduce his sentence by 22 years and he will be released soon!”

-Adam Rodrigues

Two companion cases the Supreme Court will also rule on: Carter (24-860) & Rutherford (24-820)

These two cases have been consolidated for argument before the Supreme Court and are also scheduled for oral argument on November 12, 2025.

In Carter v. United States (24-860), the Court will decide whether the U.S. Sentencing Commission acted within its expressly delegated authority when it updated U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 (effective Nov. 1, 2023) to let district courts consider, in narrowly cabined circumstances, a non-retroactive change in law as part of “extraordinary and compelling reasons.” This update includes the provision often cited as § 1B1.13(b)(6), which recognizes unusually long or “grossly inequitable” sentences tied to changes in law (and, in some contexts, youthful-offender considerations) once a person has served a substantial term (commonly referenced as 10+ years).

In Rutherford v. United States (24-820): the question is whether a district court may treat disparities created by the First Step Act’s prospective changes as “extraordinary and compelling” under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i)—most directly, the now-prohibited pre-2018 “stacking” of § 924(c) counts (5 years for the first count, +25 years for each additional count in the same case). Because Congress made the fix prospective only, many people sentenced before 2018 remain imprisoned under far longer terms than would be imposed today. Rutherford asks whether that disparity itself can be weighed in compassionate release.

Why this all matters to you?

Together with Fernandez, these cases will shape both what judges may consider (fairness/innocence concerns, non-retroactive changes in law, and § 924(c) disparities) and how they weigh it. But you don’t need to wait until after November 12; you can start the warden request, start gathering medical/family documentation and sentencing history, and building a reentry plan now. Most importantly, consult an attorney who focuses on compassionate release and is fully up to date on the 2023 policy and pending Supreme Court rulings—so you can choose the strongest grounds, preserve issues, and time filings to your advantage.

Don’t wait on the Supreme Court to decide—take action now.

Important rulings are still coming regarding compassionate release, but you don’t need to wait for a decision to begin the process. If you know of someone was given a federal sentence that was extremely long or a life sentence for drugs, or meet eligibility requirements for expanded “extraordinary and compelling reasons,” we want to review your case. At Adam Rodrigues Law, we help inmates and their families build strong cases for their compassionate release motions, plus we offer flat fee pricing to handle it.

Call Adam Rodrigues Law 615-527-2074 now or book your private consultation to start building your compassionate release motion today.

FAQs

• Who can file a compassionate release motion—can family members do it?

  Inmates themselves (“pro se”) can file the compassionate release motion. This is major improvement from before 2018, when only the the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) could file on the inmates behalf.

  Also a laywer can draft and file the motion on the inmate’s behalf. Having legal counsel can be a big help given the complexity of the law and the need to present strong evidence.

  Family members, or "someone on the inmate's behalf," can initiate the administrative request to the warden of the facility, which is the mandatory first step in the process. They can also seek legal help by hiring an attorney to file the motion on the inmate's behalf.

  However, after the initial request to the warden and the requisite waiting period (typically 30 days or administrative exhaustion), the inmate himself or his counsel files the motion in court. The family members can not file the court motion directly in their own name.

• What is "stacked" sentencing, particularly under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), and how did the First Step Act affect it?

  Before 2018, courts (under Deal v. United States) treated multiple § 924(c) counts in the same case as “second or subsequent,” so first-time defendants often received 5 years for the first count + 25 years for each additional count, all consecutive—producing decades-long terms. The First Step Act (2018) made § 924(c) a true recidivist statute: the 25-year enhancement now requires a prior, final § 924(c) conviction. That fix is prospective only, leaving many pre-2018 sentences far longer than what would be imposed today.

  Supreme Court updates (how this ties to relief now):

  • Hewitt (2025): If a stacked sentence is vacated and the person is resentenced, the court must apply the post-2018, lighter § 924(c) rules.

  • Rutherford (pending): Asks whether the pre-/post-FSA disparity from old stacking can itself be an “extraordinary and compelling” reason for compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1)(A).

  • Carter (pending): Tests whether the Sentencing Commission’s 2023 policy (§ 1B1.13(b)(6)) validly lets judges consider non-retroactive changes in law (like § 924(c) reforms) when assessing extraordinary and compelling reasons (including unusually long/grossly inequitable sentences).

  • Fernandez (pending): Addresses how broadly judges may weigh fairness/innocence-type concerns within the compassionate-release analysis.

  Bottom line: The FSA ended automatic stacking going forward; Hewitt helps at resentencing after vacatur; and Rutherford/Carter/Fernandez will clarify what judges may consider on compassionate release for those still serving old stacked terms.

• Do I really need a lawyer for compassionate release and what does it cost?

  No, you do not have have to have lawyer; you can file pro se, and some inmates even are successful. But most are denied.

  A compassionate release lawyer helps you:

  • Satisfy the warden-request/exhaustion rule and avoid dismissal.

  • Frame “extraordinary and compelling” grounds under the latest law and Sentencing Commission policy.

  • Assemble proof (medical/family/sentencing history) and a reentry plan judges trust.

  • Time filings and preserve issues as Supreme Court guidance (e.g., Fernandez, Carter, Rutherford) develops.

  • Answer the government’s opposition and handle hearings.

  Our fee: Adam Rodrigues Law charges an $8,500 flat fee for a standard § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion.
  Includes: exhaustion strategy, evidence organization, drafting/filing, proposed reentry plan, and reply briefing.
  Additional costs may incur if experts/investigators are needed, travel for live hearings, appeals, or separate resentencing/§ 924(c) litigation and this will be quoted separately and promptly.

  Call us at 615-527-2074 or book a confidential consultation for a compassionate release assistance today.

• How long does the compassionate release process take?

  There’s no fixed timeline—from start to finish, a straightforward compassionate release case may resolve in 3–6 months if uncontested, but contested or complex cases often take a year or more before a final decision is made.

• What documents are needed to support a compassionate release petition?

  You’ll want credible documentation, including medical records (detailing functional impairment or prognosis), proof of family caregiving needs (death certificates, affidavits), and a detailed re-entry plan (housing, medical treatment, community support). A complete, well-organized packet supports both the exhaustion requirement and the judge’s mercy analysis.

• What are the most common reasons compassionate release motions are denied?

  Despite the expanded access, most compassionate release motions are denied. The process is highly discretionary. Common reasons for denial include:

  1. Failure to Exhaust BOP Process: Not submitting the request to the warden first or filing the motion in court before the required 30 days have passed.

  2. Lack of "Extraordinary and Compelling" Reason: The judge is not convinced that the inmate's situation meets the high threshold for "extraordinary and compelling". This includes ordinary hardships of prison life, family separation, or moderate health issues that can be adequately managed in prison.

  3. Insufficient Evidence: Failure to provide adequate documentation (e.g., medical records, doctor's letters, death certificates) to substantiate the claims.

  4. Public Safety / Nature of the Offense: If the inmate's crime was violent or very serious, or if there's a perceived danger to the community, the court may deny the motion even with compelling circumstances. The need to protect the public often outweighs personal circumstances.

  5. Too Little Time Served: Courts frequently deny motions if they believe the inmate has not served a sufficient portion of their sentence, as early release might undermine the goals of deterrence and just punishment.

  6. Rehabilitation Alone is Not Enough: While commendable, good conduct or self-improvement in prison (rehabilitation) is not considered an extraordinary and compelling reason by itself for early release. It can, however, strengthen a motion when combined with other qualifying factors.

  7. Opposition from the Government: Strong opposition from federal prosecutors, especially if they dispute claims or emphasize public safety, can influence a judge's decision.

  8. No Suitable Release Plan: If the inmate has no stable living arrangement, medical care, or support system outside prison, a judge may be hesitant to grant release.

  9. Cases of Changed Law Where Courts Disagree: Depending on the judicial circuit, arguments based solely on non-retroactive changes in sentencing law may be rejected.

• Can the same compassionate release motion be filed again?

  If a compassionate release motion is denied, the inmate typically cannot file another motion on the exact same grounds unless there is a significant change in circumstances. Repeated motions without new, substantial grounds will likely be summarily denied. However, if the inmate's situation significantly worsens (e.g., health deteriorates further) or new evidence arises, they can try again.

• Does compassionate release affect convictions or remove supervision conditions?

  Compassionate release does not affect the underlying conviction itself, nor does it typically remove all conditions of supervision.

• How did the Supreme Court address retroactivity for § 924(c) in Hewitt (2025)?

  In Hewitt v. United States (2025), the Court held the First Step Act’s lighter § 924(c) penalties do apply at resentencing when the old stacked sentence has been vacated. Vacatur wipes out the prior sentence, so the judge must use the post-2018 rules on resentencing. (Separately, Fernandez—arg. Nov. 2025—addresses what judges may consider as “extraordinary and compelling” on compassionate release.)

---

Last Updated: September 4, 2025; For continued reading, review our Compassionate Release page.