27 F.4th 572
7th Cir.2022Background
- In 2014 Shorter pleaded guilty to possessing a stolen firearm and was sentenced to 117 months' imprisonment plus 3 years' supervised release.
- In Dec. 2020, with ~18 months left, Shorter moved pro se for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i), citing hypertension and sickle cell (he asserts increased COVID-19 risk).
- The Government disputed that Shorter had sickle cell disease (only trait) and argued he failed to show extraordinary and compelling reasons for release.
- The district court denied relief, finding sickle cell trait is not equivalent to disease, hypertension was being treated, and § 3553(a) factors (criminal history, offense seriousness) weighed against release; noted about 10 months remained and community placement might be available.
- While the appeal was pending BOP transferred Shorter to home confinement (term ends May 2022); both parties agree the appeal is moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying compassionate release by failing to adequately consider Shorter’s medical risk from COVID-19 | Shorter: court gave cursory treatment to hypertension and ignored evidence that sickle cell trait increases COVID risk | Govt: Shorter didn’t show extraordinary and compelling reasons; he has only trait not disease and hypertension is treated | Not reached on merits — appeal dismissed as moot because Shorter was released to home confinement and no further relief is possible |
| Whether Shorter needed a more thorough § 3553(a) analysis, including post-conviction conduct | Shorter: court failed to consider post-conviction rehabilitation and misapplied § 3553(a) | Govt: district court considered § 3553(a) and found factors weighed against immediate release | Not reached on merits — mootness prevents review |
| Whether the appeal remains live because Shorter might be returned to custody later | Shorter: hypothetical future re-incarceration could make relief meaningful | Govt: future re-incarceration is speculative and cannot save the appeal from mootness | Court: speculative possibility of future incarceration is insufficient to avoid mootness; appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Chestnut, 989 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2021) (similar facts; release pending appeal rendered compassionate-release claim moot)
- Sanchez-Gomez v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1532 (2018) (party must maintain a personal stake throughout the appeal)
- Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, 569 U.S. 66 (2013) (intervening circumstances that eliminate a party’s stake require dismissal as moot)
- Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1 (1998) (speculative future events do not preserve a live controversy)
- Preiser v. Newkirk, 422 U.S. 395 (1975) (no reasonable expectation that the alleged wrong will be repeated supports mootness)
- United States v. Newton, 996 F.3d 485 (7th Cir. 2021) (district courts must give focused consideration to compassionate-release medical arguments)