United States v. ALBERTO-SOSA, 2:17-cr-00446

Jose Manuel Alberto-Sosa pled guilty in 2019 to manufacturing and possessing child pornography, receiving a 262-month sentence as part of a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement.
He filed a pro se motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), seeking a reduction to time served.
Alberto-Sosa argued for release based on harsh prison conditions (especially during the COVID-19 pandemic), ineffective assistance of counsel, and medical issues (primarily hypertension).
The government opposed the motion.
The court reviewed whether these reasons constituted “extraordinary and compelling” grounds for compassionate release, per the First Step Act and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13.

Issue	Alberto-Sosa's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Harsh prison conditions (COVID-19 & ongoing)	Lockdowns, poor facilities & care justify release	Issues are generalized, not unique or exceptional	General issues don’t qualify as extraordinary/compelling
Ineffective assistance/constitutional violations	Denied rights, counsel forced plea, due process infringed	Not proper grounds for § 3582 motion (use § 2255)	Not cognizable; already addressed and denied on habeas
Medical condition (hypertension)	High blood pressure is not managed; COVID/lockdowns worsened health	BOP is providing adequate care, not life-threatening	No evidence of inadequate care; not extraordinary/compelling
Hyperlipidemia claim	High cholesterol worsens condition	Not substantiated by medical record	No proof of condition; not grounds for release

Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817 (limitations on sentence modification post-judgment)
Raia v. United States, 954 F.3d 594 (proper exhaustion and generalized COVID-19 prison concerns insufficient)
Davis v. United States, 417 U.S. 333 (proper route for constitutional claims is via habeas under § 2255)
Stewart, 86 F.4th 532 (Third Circuit – grant of compassionate release is discretionary)