United States v. Hilliard, 2:19-cr-00092

Eziar Hilliard pled guilty to robbery and brandishing a firearm after robbing a pregnant Domino’s pizza delivery driver in Milwaukee in 2019.
Hilliard was sentenced to a total of 87 months (3 months for robbery, 84 months for firearm offense), a sentence at the bottom of the guideline range based on his acceptance of responsibility and the absence of physical injury.
In March 2024, Hilliard, proceeding pro se, moved for compassionate release, citing his youth, immaturity, and drug abuse at the time of his offense, as well as rehabilitation efforts and allegedly low recidivism risk.
The Government opposed release, and Hilliard failed to file a reply brief; the court considered the motion on the merits.
The court evaluated whether Hilliard provided “extraordinary and compelling reasons” for early release and whether release was warranted under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Exhaustion of administrative remedies	Not raised	Appears not fully exhausted, but not contested	Not a bar to review; merits considered
Extraordinary and compelling reasons	Factors cited are not extraordinary or compelling	Age, immaturity, drug abuse justify release	No extraordinary or compelling reasons found
Impact of drug abuse and youth on sentence	Neither was a motivating factor for the crime	Both affected decision-making at the time	Not sufficient without direct causal link
Appropriateness under § 3553(a) sentencing	Serious and traumatic offense warrants original sentence	Positive rehabilitation supports release	Sentence remains appropriate and is not reduced

United States v. Gunn, 980 F.3d 1178 (7th Cir. 2020) (held that the sentencing commission’s policy statement on compassionate release did not control prisoner-initiated motions, granting district courts broad discretion)
United States v. Thacker, 4 F.4th 569 (7th Cir. 2021) (district courts must first find “extraordinary and compelling reasons” before moving to the § 3553(a) analysis)