Third Circuit Holds the Supreme Court's Decision in Concepcion v. United States Did Not Overrule Its Decision in United States v. Andrews

In United States v. Stewart, 86 F.4th 532, the Third Circuit considered whether the Supreme Court's decision in Concepcion v. United States, 597 U.S. 481 (2022), overruled its earlier decision in United States v. Andrews, 12 F.4th 255 (3d Cir. 2021). In Andrews, the Third Circuit held that "neither the length of a lawfully imposed sentence nor any nonretroactive changes to mandatory minimum sentences" qualifies as "extraordinary and compelling reasons" allowing a district court to grant a reduction in sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).  The defendant in Stewart argued that this limitation conflicted with the Supreme Court's decision in Concepcion, which held that courts considering whether to grant relief under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act may consider intervening changes of fact and law.

The Third Circuit disagreed and held that Andrews survives Concepcion.  The Court found Concepcion distinguishable because it did not address § 3582 and involved a defendant whom the government conceded was statutorily eligible for relief.  The Court therefore found that Concepcion did not address the threshold question of whether someone is eligible for a reduced sentence. The limitations on what qualifies as "extraordinary and compelling reasons" announced in Andrews therefore remain binding notwithstanding Concepcion.  

The Third Circuit nevertheless noted that the Sentencing Commission recently amended its policy statement to expand what qualifies as "extraordinary and compelling reasons" making a defendant eligible for a reduction in sentence.  The Court suggested it would consider the amendments' effect on Andrews in an appropriate case but declined to do so in Stewart.

A copy of the opinion is available at: https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/222770p.pdf.