Rehabilitation and health win man release in Ohio (2021)

Originally published March 23, 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)).
COVID-19 and outbreaks. Today a court looks at whether the prison is affected, or at imminent risk of being affected, by an ongoing infectious disease outbreak or public health emergency, and whether the person faces a higher risk of severe illness or death that cannot be reduced in time (U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(1)(D)).

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

A federal judge in the Southern District of Ohio granted compassionate release to Curtis N. Mack. The court pointed to his health risks, his many accomplishments in prison, and his strong family and community support.

What he argued

Mack filed his own motion for compassionate release. Once his case reached the district court, he was appointed a lawyer.

His main argument was that he had pulmonary hypertension (high blood pressure in the lungs), which put him at greater risk from COVID-19. He also argued that he had received enhanced 924(c) penalties that, at the time, would not have applied if he had been sentenced then.

His rehabilitation in prison

Mack also took many steps toward rehabilitation. The court described them this way:

Defendant obtained his barber’s license; completed the Life Connections Program, an 18-month program; obtained a commercial driver’s license; completed 120 hours of training as a solar panel installer; completed a drug abuse program; completed training in aerial lift safety, fire extinguishers, and occupational safety and health; completed an EPA training course in mold prevention and remediation; and viewed motivational self-help videos. United States v. Mack, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53947 (S.D. Ohio).

Compassionate Release Example

United States v. Mack, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53947

Why the judge said yes

The court looked at everything together: Mack’s health concerns, his many accomplishments and serious rehabilitation efforts in prison, and his strong family and community support, including job offers. Combined, these were enough to be an extraordinary reason for compassionate release.

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