How Courts Decide Release Motions Without a Hearing

Not necessarily. A federal judge can decide a compassionate release motion on the written filings, without a hearing and without bringing the person to court by video. On October 23, 2026, the Fifth Circuit applied that rule in United States v. Ekene, No. 25-20448, an unpublished decision that is not binding precedent. It affirmed a denial that rested entirely on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors.

What happened

Francis Ekene was convicted for his part in a years-long conspiracy to defraud Medicare of millions of dollars and received a below-guidelines sentence. He later moved for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). On appeal, he pointed to his lack of prior criminal history, his rehabilitation, his low risk of reoffending and his poor health as reasons the § 3553(a) factors favored him.

The district judge, who had also imposed the original sentence, denied the motion. The judge found that a shorter sentence would not reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote respect for the law, provide just punishment, deter crime or protect the public. The judge also found that Ekene's medical needs did not favor release because he was receiving sufficient medical care.

What the court decided

The § 3553(a) factors were enough. The court of appeals did not decide whether Ekene had shown "extraordinary and compelling reasons." It said the district court's "alternative consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors provides a sufficient basis for affirmance." Ekene's argument that the factors favored him was, in the court's words, "mere disagreement with the district court," which "does not warrant reversal."

No hearing was required. Ekene also argued the judge should have held an evidentiary hearing by video before ruling. The court said he had not shown that skipping one was an abuse of discretion, citing Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43(b)(4).

Why the rules work this way

Two pieces of federal law explain the result.

• The statute requires the factors. Section 3582(c)(1)(A) lets a court reduce a sentence only "after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a) to the extent that they are applicable." So a judge can deny a motion on those factors even if the reasons for release are strong.
• Rule 43 does not require presence. Rule 43(b)(4) says a defendant "need not be present" when "[t]he proceeding involves the correction or reduction of sentence under Rule 35 or 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)." A judge may still choose to hold a hearing, but the rule does not require one.

What this means for a motion

• Write the motion as if it is the only chance to be heard. Because a judge can rule on the papers, the motion and its exhibits need to carry the whole case. Our guide to medical records for compassionate release covers the records that tend to matter.
• Answer the § 3553(a) factors directly. A motion that proves extraordinary and compelling reasons can still fail on the factors, especially before the judge who imposed the sentence. Address the seriousness of the offense, the time already served and what release would look like.
• Health claims need more than a diagnosis. In Ekene, the judge found the person was getting sufficient medical care in prison. Records showing that the BOP is not meeting, or cannot meet, a medical need speak to both parts of the test.
• On appeal, disagreement is not enough. Courts of appeals review these denials for abuse of discretion, so the full case for release needs to be made in the district court.

Our process guide walks through each step, from the request to the warden to the court's decision.