December 2022 Supreme Court Criminal Law Update editorial image showing abstract United States v. Hansen immigration encouragement review, Lora § 924(j) sentencing discretion, Samia redacted co-defendant confession and Confrontation Clause issue, Smith improper venue remedy, EQUAL Act crack sentencing reform, compassionate release, Fair Sentencing Act relief, and federal post-conviction screening.
by

Latest Updates

December 2022 Federal Restitution Crack Sentencing Developments

Federal appellate and sentencing developments involving restitution garnishment, the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, Consumer Credit Protection Act limits, retirement and disability benefits, crack and powder cocaine charging policy, DOJ sentencing guidance, BOP relief statistics, and federal case-screening considerations for the week of December 12–16, 2022.

“`

Federal Relief Developments Overview

December 2022 Federal Restitution Crack Sentencing Developments included a favorable Ninth Circuit restitution decision involving garnishment limits under the MVRA and Consumer Credit Protection Act, along with major Department of Justice sentencing-policy guidance involving crack and powder cocaine charging practices.

This weekly update highlights developments from December 12–16, 2022, including United States v. Wells, the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, the Consumer Credit Protection Act, the All Writs Act, restitution garnishment, retirement and disability benefits, Attorney General Garland’s December 2022 charging memorandum, crack cocaine sentencing, powder cocaine comparison, Fair Sentencing Act, EQUAL Act, and BOP relief statistics.

This federal relief update is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create legal representation.

Supreme Court Watch

Holiday Recess and Upcoming Conferences

During the week ending December 16, 2022, the source update noted that the Supreme Court was not scheduled to hold additional conferences until the following year.

No new Supreme Court criminal-law opinion was identified in the source update for this week, but federal appellate and executive-branch sentencing developments remained important for case screening.

Federal Relief Consideration: Even during weeks without new Supreme Court criminal decisions, federal prisoners and families may need to monitor appellate rulings, DOJ policy, BOP statistics, Sentencing Commission activity, and pending guideline or statutory reforms.

Favorable Federal Appellate Developments

Ninth Circuit: Restitution Garnishment Limits in United States v. Wells

In United States v. Wells, No. 20-30009, the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court’s restitution order and remanded for further proceedings.

Wells had been ordered to pay $1,921,640 in restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act. The district court required restitution payments using 80% of monthly retirement and disability benefits.

Wells argued that the Consumer Credit Protection Act, incorporated into the MVRA, limited garnishment of “earnings” to 25%. The district court concluded it could use the All Writs Act to order a higher percentage.

The Ninth Circuit rejected that approach. Because the MVRA creates specific statutory requirements for garnishing earnings, the All Writs Act could not be used to sidestep those requirements. The case was remanded for the district court to determine whether each benefit stream constituted “earnings” under 15 U.S.C. § 1673. If so, garnishment was limited to 25%.

Federal Relief Consideration: Restitution and collection cases may deserve review where the government seeks to garnish retirement, disability, wages, benefits, or other periodic payment streams above statutory limits.

Other News

Attorney General Garland’s Crack and Powder Cocaine Charging Guidance

The source update discussed Attorney General Garland’s December 2022 federal charging and sentencing guidance, including instructions for federal prosecutors to promote equivalent treatment of crack and powder cocaine offenses.

Under federal law, crack cocaine historically triggered much harsher mandatory minimum penalties than powder cocaine at lower drug quantities. The Fair Sentencing Act reduced the disparity from 100-to-1 to 18-to-1, but did not fully eliminate it.

Garland’s memo directed federal prosecutors in crack cocaine cases to charge pertinent statutory quantities that apply to powder cocaine and to advocate for sentences consistent with powder cocaine rather than crack cocaine treatment.

Federal Relief Consideration: DOJ charging guidance may influence current charging decisions, plea negotiations, and sentencing advocacy, but it does not automatically reduce old sentences or replace statutory and guideline relief mechanisms.

Fair Sentencing Act, EQUAL Act, and Retroactivity Limits

The source update also discussed ongoing legislative debate over crack and powder cocaine sentencing disparity, including the EQUAL Act and competing proposals to reduce or eliminate the disparity.

Proposed legislation and DOJ policy should be separated from enacted law. A bill does not change a sentence unless Congress passes it and the President signs it. DOJ policy may guide prosecutors, but retroactive relief generally requires a valid legal vehicle.

Federal Relief Consideration: Crack cocaine cases may need screening for Fair Sentencing Act eligibility, First Step Act § 404 relief, compassionate release, § 3582(c)(2), guideline amendments, § 2255 issues, § 2241 issues, or clemency.

Why Restitution Garnishment Review Matters

Restitution orders can follow a person long after sentencing. The amount owed, payment schedule, garnishment method, and type of income being collected can all matter.

In Wells, the Ninth Circuit clarified that when Congress has supplied specific statutory garnishment limits, courts cannot rely on the All Writs Act to bypass those limits.

Federal Relief Consideration: Restitution review may require examining the judgment, restitution order, payment schedule, garnishment application, income source, benefit type, retirement plan documents, disability benefit records, and statutory collection authority.

Why Retirement and Disability Benefits Require Careful Review

Retirement and disability payment streams may be treated differently depending on the statute, the source of benefits, and whether the payments qualify as “earnings.”

The key question in a restitution-garnishment case may not be whether restitution is owed, but how much of a particular income stream may lawfully be collected at one time.

Federal Relief Consideration: Benefit-garnishment review may require identifying each payment stream separately and determining whether statutory protections or caps apply to each one.

Why Crack and Powder Cocaine Review Matters

Federal crack cocaine sentencing has changed repeatedly over time, but not every reform applies retroactively to every person.

A person sentenced under older crack cocaine penalties may need a structured review to determine whether any current relief pathway applies. This may include First Step Act § 404, compassionate release, guideline amendments, prior § 851 enhancement review, statutory penalty review, or clemency.

Federal Relief Consideration: Crack-sentencing review may require the indictment, plea agreement, jury findings, drug quantity, statutory penalty range, PSR, § 851 information, sentencing transcript, prior reduction history, and current law.

Why DOJ Policy Is Not the Same as Retroactive Relief

DOJ policy can affect how prosecutors charge current cases and what sentences they recommend. However, internal executive-branch guidance does not automatically reopen final judgments.

For people already sentenced, relief usually depends on a statute, rule, guideline amendment, court decision, BOP administrative process, or executive clemency pathway that applies to the person’s case.

Federal Relief Consideration: A case should be screened to determine whether the best pathway is court-based relief, BOP administrative relief, sentence reduction, retroactive guideline review, compassionate release, or clemency.

BOP Relief Statistics Snapshot

The source update identified Bureau of Prisons statistics available at that time, including:

  • Fair Sentencing and retroactive sentence reductions: 3,972 orders granted
  • Elderly Offender Home Confinement: 1,216 approved
  • First Step Act releases: 11,294 granted
  • Compassionate release and sentence reductions: 4,370 granted

The source update also noted that four new compassionate-release motions and one Fair Sentencing Act or retroactive sentence-reduction request were granted during the week.

Federal Relief Consideration: BOP and sentence-reduction statistics provide context, but they do not determine whether a specific person qualifies for relief.

Fast Screening Considerations

A case-specific review may be especially important where any of the following issues appear in the record:

  • Restitution collection is being taken from retirement benefits
  • Restitution collection is being taken from disability benefits
  • Government seeks more than 25% of a payment stream that may qualify as earnings
  • Restitution order or garnishment relies on the All Writs Act despite specific MVRA collection rules
  • Judgment or payment schedule does not clearly explain collection limits
  • Sentence involved crack cocaine mandatory minimums
  • Case may qualify for Fair Sentencing Act or First Step Act § 404 review
  • DOJ crack/powder policy may support current sentencing advocacy
  • Possible compassionate-release theory based on unusually long crack sentence
  • BOP, First Step Act, compassionate release, or retroactive sentence-reduction questions remain unresolved

What This Means for Federal Prisoners and Families

The December 12–16, 2022 developments show that federal relief and case review may involve more than convictions and prison terms. Restitution collection, garnishment limits, income source protections, crack/powder cocaine disparity, DOJ charging policy, and retroactive relief rules can all affect a federal case.

These issues often require reviewing the judgment, restitution order, garnishment documents, income and benefit records, indictment, drug quantity findings, PSR, sentencing transcript, First Step Act history, BOP records, and current case law.

Why a Written Case Evaluation May Help

A written case evaluation can help identify whether a federal case involves restitution garnishment issues, MVRA collection limits, retirement or disability benefit protections, crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity, Fair Sentencing Act eligibility, First Step Act § 404 issues, compassionate-release factors, guideline-amendment screening, BOP credit issues, § 2255 issues, § 2241 issues, or other post-conviction remedies.

Because many federal relief arguments are highly fact-specific, circuit-specific, and procedure-specific, families should avoid relying on general reform headlines alone. A structured review can help determine what issues may actually be available.

Related APEX Federal Relief Resources