Judge grants release over harsh stacked sentence (2021)

Originally published April 16, 2021. Statements about the law were updated in October 2026; the box below gives today’s rules.

What the law says now (October 2026). A federal judge can reduce a sentence for “extraordinary and compelling” reasons (reasons that are especially unusual and convincing). You must first ask the warden in writing. You can file in court 30 days after the warden gets the request, or sooner if you finish the Bureau of Prisons’ appeals (18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)). The judge also weighs the sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See who may seek compassionate release.

Changes in sentencing law. In Rutherford v. United States (May 28, 2026), the Supreme Court held that when Congress makes a sentencing change non-retroactive (meaning it does not apply to people already sentenced), such as the First Step Act’s end of “stacked” § 924(c) sentences, the gap between an old sentence and today’s sentence cannot be an “extraordinary and compelling” reason, alone or combined with other reasons. Some older posts here describe court wins on that theory; those wins are history, not today’s law.
Rehabilitation. By law, rehabilitation alone is not an extraordinary and compelling reason (28 U.S.C. § 994(t)). It can be weighed together with other reasons (U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(d)).

Outcomes vary. A past result does not predict or guarantee the outcome of any other case.

In April 2021, a federal judge in Pennsylvania granted compassionate release to Syeed Briggs, who was serving 32 years for armed robbery. At the time, the court said his unduly harsh sentence, together with his strong rehabilitation in prison, was an extraordinary and compelling reason to let him go home.

Harsh Sentence

United States v. Briggs

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71790

An unduly harsh sentence

In March 2008, the court sentenced Briggs to 32 years in prison on two armed robbery counts, plus one day for conspiracy to commit bank robbery.

The laws in place then required his sentences to be “stacked,” meaning served one after another, which led to a very long prison term. Even at sentencing, the judge openly said the sentence was unduly harsh.

Briggs later asked for compassionate release because of how excessive his sentence was.

His rehabilitation in prison

The court found that Briggs is not a danger to the community. While in prison, he:

completed over 200 hours of education on many topics, including 69 hours of Release Preparation Programs that help people get ready to return home;
worked as a laundry presser for seven years; and
held a food service job for three years.

He kept strong ties with his family, including his four children, and wants to be more present in their lives. His mother and stepfather will give him a home, and his stepfather offered him a job in his landscaping business.

Briggs was 26 when he committed the crimes. He is now 40. The court noted that young offenders who work hard to better themselves in prison can become fully rehabilitated, which makes them much less likely to commit new crimes.

Why the judge said yes

The court found that Briggs understood how serious his crimes were, showed remorse, and was committed to doing better.

At the time, the court held that the severity of his sentence, combined with his marked rehabilitation and good behavior in prison, was an extraordinary and compelling reason to grant compassionate release.

If you want help with a compassionate release request, book a consultation.