United States v. James Hill
21-3109
| 3rd Cir. | Feb 15, 2022Background
- James Hill was convicted in 2018 of being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and sentenced in 2019 to 70 months’ imprisonment; projected BOP release date was September 3, 2023.
- In August 2021 Hill (pro se) moved for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), citing fatty liver disease, liver failure, asthma, nerve/muscle damage from gunshots, vitamin D deficiency, and alleged “long‑haul” COVID symptoms; he had a prior asymptomatic COVID infection in December 2020.
- Hill claimed the BOP had not adequately treated his liver condition and said he had not been offered the COVID‑19 vaccine (a refusal form exists with his name, which he disputes); he has not shown that he consulted prison medical staff about vaccination.
- The District Court denied compassionate release, finding Hill’s medical conditions were controlled in prison, his prior COVID infection was asymptomatic and fully resolved, and his situation did not constitute an “extraordinary and compelling” reason for release.
- The District Court also held that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors weighed against release given Hill’s criminal history (prior felonies for unlicensed gun possession and a felony drug conviction) and that he had served only about 39 months of a 70‑month sentence.
- The Third Circuit granted the Government’s motion for summary affirmance, concluding the appeal presented no substantial question and the District Court did not abuse its discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hill’s medical conditions and COVID risk constitute "extraordinary and compelling" reasons for compassionate release | Hill: fatty liver, liver failure, asthma, long‑haul COVID increase risk of severe reinfection and justify release | Gov/District Ct: conditions are controlled at FCI Schuylkill; Hill had an asymptomatic COVID case and recovered; high vaccination rate at the facility and Hill declined/has not pursued vaccine | Denied — medical conditions did not rise to "extraordinary and compelling" reasons for release |
| Whether § 3553(a) factors support immediate release | Hill: no history of violence, seeks relief based on health and rehabilitation | Gov/District Ct: Hill’s prior felonies (guns, drug distribution) and current offense show continued illegal firearm possession; release after ~39 months would not reflect seriousness or deter | Denied — § 3553(a) factors weigh against release |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pawlowski, 967 F.3d 327 (3d Cir. 2020) (standard of review for district court weighing of factors in compassionate release decisions)
- Oddi v. Ford Motor Co., 234 F.3d 136 (3d Cir. 2000) (deference to district court factual determinations; abuse of discretion standard)
- United States v. Andrews, 12 F.4th 255 (3d Cir. 2021) (procedural and substantive guidance on § 3582(c)(1)(A) and § 3553(a) analysis)
- Garrett v. Murphy, 17 F.4th 419 (3d Cir. 2021) (availability of COVID‑19 vaccines reduces need for compassionate release)
- United States v. Burgard, [citation="857 F. App'x 254"] (7th Cir. 2021) (widespread vaccine availability undermines claims for compassionate release based on COVID risk)