United States v. Shareef, 1:06-cr-00919

Derrick Shareef was sentenced to 35 years in prison in 2008 after pleading guilty to attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction, related to a planned attack on a mall, which was disrupted by law enforcement via an undercover informant.
At the time of the offense, Shareef was 21 years old and described as impressionable, with a difficult upbringing and lacking stable parental guidance.
The offense was planned in cooperation with an FBI informant who, according to Shareef, heavily influenced and pressured him in both religious and ideological terms.
Shareef's rehabilitation in prison has been extensive, with numerous positive statements from prison staff and participation in educational and programmatic efforts over the course of his incarceration.
Shareef filed a motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), arguing his rehabilitation, youth at the time of offense, and government inducement as grounds for sentence reduction.
The Court had previously denied a § 2255 motion challenging the sentence on ineffective assistance of counsel and entrapment grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether extensive rehabilitation qualifies as 'extraordinary and compelling' reason for release	Shareef argued his significant rehabilitation invalidates the need for continued incarceration.	Rehabilitation alone is not sufficient under the law.	Rehabilitation alone cannot justify sentence reduction.
Whether youth/brain development at the time of offense supports release	Shareef contended his underdeveloped brain contributed to the offense and warrants leniency.	These mitigation factors were presented and rejected at sentencing.	Previously argued and considered, not grounds for reduction now.
Whether the government informant's inducement supports release	The informant's manipulation and pressure played an extraordinary role in the offense.	This factor was weighed at sentencing and rejected by the judge.	Factor already considered; not grounds for sentence reduction.
Cumulative effect of all three grounds (rehabilitation, youth, inducement)	The combination of factors collectively meets the 'extraordinary and compelling' standard.	The same factors were weighed and rejected at sentencing; no legal basis for different result.	Cumulative effect does not constitute extraordinary reasons.

United States v. Thacker, 4 F.4th 569 (7th Cir. 2021) (compassionate release available only for extraordinary and compelling reasons)
United States v. Newton, 996 F.3d 485 (7th Cir. 2021) (court's discretion in compassionate release is limited by statutory and policy statement standards)
United States v. Vaughn, 62 F.4th 1071 (7th Cir. 2023) (court may consider factors collectively when assessing compassionate release)
United States v. Peoples, 41 F.4th 837 (7th Cir. 2022) (rehabilitation alone not extraordinary and compelling reason for release)