11th Cir.

United States v. Chandler

July 6, 2026 ·0:15-cr-60318-BB-1 ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a federal prisoner's motion for compassionate release. The court held that the appellant abandoned key arguments on appeal and that the relevant statutory amendments are not retroactive.

Background

Zachary Chandler, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appealed the district court’s denial of his motion for compassionate release under Section eighteen United States Code Section three five eight two subsection C one A. Chandler argued the district court erred in concluding that the amendment to Section eighteen United States Code Section nine two four C one was not made retroactive.

The court’s reasoning

The court granted the Government’s motion for summary affirmance. It found that Chandler failed to challenge the district court’s independently sufficient grounds for denying his motion, including the determination that sentencing factors weighed against reduction and that he did not establish an extraordinary and compelling reason based on age or other provisions. The court further held that amendments to Section nine two four C under Section four zero three of the First Step Act are not retroactive and cannot serve as an extraordinary and compelling reason for relief.

What it means going forward

The ruling confirms that sentencing disparities arising from non-retroactive amendments to firearm statutes do not qualify as extraordinary and compelling reasons for compassionate release.