9th Cir.

United States v. Smith

June 29, 2026 ·3:24-cr-05279-TMC-1 ·Unpublished · By James Taylor

The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's denial of a motion for compassionate release. The panel held that the district court properly applied sentencing guidelines and did not abuse its discretion in finding the defendant's family circumstances were not extraordinary and compelling.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 0:54

Background

Scott Justin Smith appealed pro se from a district court order denying his motion for compassionate release. Smith argued that his family circumstances were extraordinary and compelling because the mother of his younger child has cancer and the mother of his older child has relinquished parental rights, leading to likely adoption.

The court’s reasoning

The panel concluded that the district court was bound by United States Sentencing Guidelines Section one B one point thirteen. The court found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Smith’s family circumstances were not extraordinary and compelling under the guidelines. Because the court properly denied the motion based on the guidelines, it was not required to address Smith’s rehabilitation or the factors under Section eighteen U.S.C. three thousand five hundred fifty-three A.

What it means going forward

This decision reinforces that district courts must strictly apply United States Sentencing Guidelines Section one B one point thirteen when ruling on compassionate release motions and that appellate courts will not find an abuse of discretion if the guidelines are followed.