Fernandez v. United States · ¶73

The majority offers little by way of a text-based comeback. Focusing on the word “compelling,” the majority observes that what “is compelling in one context is not necessarily so in another”; for example, a 25th wedding anniversary may be a “compelling” reason to shorten a business trip but not a prison sentence. Ante, at 423. While obviously true, that observation tells us nothing relevant. All agree that personal considerations (e. g., illness and family hardship) might warrant a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(1)(A), see ante, at 423–425, yet those considerations, too, are more or less “compelling” under various circumstances. Moreover, as explained in Part II–A, infra, Fernandez's claim of actual innocence, if meritorious, would be a compelling reason to reduce his sentence. At the time the District Court considered his § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion, Fernandez had already served 11…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.