Supreme Court: Challenges to a Conviction Belong in § 2255, Not Compassionate Release

You cannot use a compassionate release motion to argue that your loved one's conviction was wrong. On May 28, 2026, in Fernandez v. United States, the Supreme Court held that those arguments must go through 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Joe Fernandez had already lost challenges to his murder-for-hire conviction, including under § 2255. He then filed a compassionate release motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582. He raised doubts about the evidence against him. The trial judge had even written that he was "troubled" by how the government treated an alleged co-conspirator.

The Court said § 2255 has strict rules: a one-year deadline, limits on second motions, and rules against re-raising old claims. Compassionate release has only one procedural step, asking the Bureau of Prisons first. The Court held that § 3582 cannot be used to get around those limits. (The Reporter's syllabus, which is not part of the opinion, puts it this way: § 3582 "does not provide a shortcut around the postconviction statutes.") Claims that a conviction is invalid, including claims of innocence, are not "extraordinary and compelling reasons."

What this means for your family

Keep two kinds of claims separate:

• Compassionate release is about what is happening now, such as serious illness, age, or a family emergency.
• Attacks on the conviction or sentence usually belong in a direct appeal or a § 2255 motion, which have tight deadlines.

Mixing them can waste time a family does not have.

Your next step

Make a simple list: health problems, family needs, and any legal errors you believe happened. A lawyer can sort which path fits each one. Book a consultation to talk about your case.