JASON93 / LEGAL TECHSearch the reference
AuthorityCurrent through August 26, 2026View as Markdown

Legal review · Links checked : the source is available · Scope & methodology

This record is not a citator check. Confirm later history and treatment before relying on it.

authority type
case
jurisdiction
federal_nationwide
publication status
published_united_states_reports
precedential status
binding
decision or issuance date
2022-06-27
subsequent history
Current official source reviewed through 2026-08-25.
negative treatment status
No overruling or superseding enactment identified in official-primary-source review through 2026-08-25; comprehensive commercial citator not run.
material limitations
Use only for the propositions and boundaries stated in the linked canonical module.

Open official source ↗

Linked modules

Concepcion v. United States

Holdings used

  • A district court may consider intervening changes of law or fact when exercising discretion under First Step Act § 404.
  • It must consider nonfrivolous arguments the parties present, but need not be persuaded and need provide only a brief statement of reasons.
  • The benchmark Guidelines range may be recalculated only to reflect retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act; other changes may inform the later discretionary choice.

Material limitations

The Court did not require a sentence reduction. The case decided a § 404 motion, not compassionate release. Its benchmark limitation forecloses treating the proceeding as an unrestricted plenary resentencing.

Official source and pinpoint

597 U.S. 481, 486 and 496–502, especially 498 n.6: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1650_new_4gci.pdf