No. 23-6403

Tony L. Ford v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2024-01-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: concepcion-precedent concepcion-v-united-states criminal-resentencing eleventh-circuit eleventh-circuit-interpretation fair-sentencing-act first-step-act intervening-law-changes sentencing sentencing-discretion statutory-penalty
Latest Conference: 2024-02-16
Question Presented (from Petition)

Previously, the courts of appeals were divided over whether a district court could consider intervening changes to the law during First Step Act proceedings. Last year, this Court addressed the matter in Concepcion v. United States, 597 U.S. 481 (2022), and held that "the First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence pursuant to the First Step Act." Id. at 2404. However, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has since held a district court's discretion is far more limited. Specifically, the Eleventh Circuit held that, before it has authority to reduce a defendant's sentence under the First Step Act, a district court must determine whether the defendant has already received the lowest statutory penalty based only on the Fair Sentencing Act and not taking any other intervening changes to the law into account.

Whether the Eleventh Circuit's limitation on First Step relief contravenes Concepcion's holding, that in deciding whether to reduce the sentence of an eligible defendant, court's may consider intervening changes of law?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Eleventh Circuit's limitation on First Step relief contravenes Concepcion's holding, that in deciding whether to reduce the sentence of an eligible defendant, court's may consider intervening changes of law?

Docket Entries

2024-02-20
Petition DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. See 28 U. S. C. §455(b)(3) and Code of Conduct for Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, Canon 3B(2)(e) (prior government employment).
2024-01-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-12-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 2, 2024)
2023-11-21
Application (23A458) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until December 28, 2023.
2023-11-16
Application (23A458) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 28, 2023 to December 28, 2023, submitted to Justice Thomas.

Attorneys

Tony Ford
Meghan CollinsOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent