Originally published May 7, 2021. Statements about the law were updated in October 2026; the box below gives today’s rules.
Outcomes vary. A past result does not predict or guarantee the outcome of any other case.
Asking the judge for compassionate release again and again does not make a grant more likely. In May 2021, a federal appeals court upheld the denial of David L. Newton’s request, even after he added new reasons and got a second hearing.
United States v. Newton
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 13266
His sentence
Newton has been in prison since 2009, when he pleaded guilty to two counts of bank robbery and one count of possessing and firing a gun during a bank robbery. The court sentenced him to a total of 220 months in prison and five years of supervised release.
His requests for release
In May 2020, after serving nearly twelve years, Newton filed a motion for compassionate release. He first argued that his asthma, combined with the Bureau of Prisons’ mismanagement of the pandemic, was an extraordinary and compelling reason for release.
A month later, he added a second reason: long-term use of a corticosteroid for his asthma weakened his immune system and put him at even greater risk from COVID-19.
He also gave a detailed release plan. If released, he could live either with his grandmother and uncle at their home or with his father and his father’s wife at theirs.
In July 2020, Newton caught COVID-19. Three weeks later, a prison doctor wrote that his infection had “resolved” and that he “did not have a severe illness requiring hospitalization.” Newton still reported “recurrent intermittent coughs, headaches, and asthma flare-ups for which he had to use inhalers more frequently.”
What the courts decided
The district court denied Newton’s motion, finding he had not shown “extraordinary and compelling reasons” for release.
That judgment was later vacated (set aside) and sent back for more review. Newton’s lawyer had argued that the court did not fully consider the motion and looked at his COVID-19 risk factors one at a time instead of together.
On reconsideration, Newton’s lawyer had a chance to make the full case. The court still disagreed with his reasons, especially his claim that the BOP had mishandled COVID-19, because cases had dropped sharply at his prison.
The appeals court found that the district court had acted within its discretion and agreed that Newton did not show extraordinary and compelling reasons for release, despite his multiple requests.
If you want help with a compassionate release request, book a consultation.