SAMARITAN NEWSLETTER - 11-10-2025

SAMARITAN PROJECTS

4415 Gladstone Blvd.

Kansas City, MO 64123

417 901 3000

attorneytnorridnews@gmail.com

samaritanprojects@gmail.com

APPEAL/CR.RIS. The Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded United States v. Swartz, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 28718 (4th Cir. Nov. 3, 2025). Most relevant here, the Sentencing Guidelines expressly provide that "[t]he death or incapacitation of the caregiver of the defendant's . . . child who is 18 years of age or older and incapable of self-care because of a mental or physical disability or a medical condition" constitutes an "[e]xtraordinary and [c]ompelling [r]eason[]" for compassionate release. USSG1B1.13(b)(3)(A) (2025). Although Swartz explained in his motion that his wife-who was previously the sole caregiver for Swartz's son-had recently passed away, the district court rejected this ground for release based on the erroneous assumption that Swartz's wife was "still there" to care for the son. Because the district court "relie[d] on [an] erroneous factual . . . premise[]" to deny Swartz's motion, United States v. Bethea, 54 F.4th at 831, the court found the district court abused its discretion in denying compassionate release.

CR.RIS/OLD LAW. United States v. Darrel King, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218661 (N.D. Calif. Nov. 4, 2025). In 1981, King was convicted in California state court of several crimes, the most serious of which was first degree murder. Described in contemporaneous news reports as a "drug kingpin," King allegedly killed the victim for interfering in his reputed heroin-trafficking operation. For his state law crimes, King was given a sentence of 27 or 29 years to life. Following his state court conviction, King was tried and convicted in federal court on six counts of federal drug trafficking offenses under 21 USC 841(a)(1), as well as a seventh count of engaging in a CCE under 21 USC 848. On Feb. 22, 1982, King received three consecutive 15-year sentences for Counts One through Three of the indictment, three additional concurrent 15-year sentences for Counts Four through Six, and a concurrent 45-year sentence for Count Seven, for a total sentence of 45 years. King was imprisoned by the state of California for approximately 38 years, from his conviction in 1981, until his parole in 2019. Because the federal crimes for which he was convicted took place prior to Nov. 1, 1987, King's eligibility for so-called "compassionate release" has, prior to now, been governed by 18 USC 4205(g), which required the Bureau of Prisons to initiate any motion for such release; an inmate could not petition the court directly under the "new law" procedures set out in 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A). Congress has allowed 4205(g) to lapse. Considering the factors set out in 18 USC 3553, compassionate release under all the circumstances here, including the approximately six years King has served for his federal convictions, and the 38 years he served for his state conviction, is warranted. Sentence reduced to time served.

CR.RIS/DISPARITY/USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). The District of South Carolina granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Shannon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213356 (D. S.C. Oct. 29, 2025). Shannon was charged with a single count of conspiracy to possess more than one kilogram of heroin with the intent to distribute as prohibited by 21 USC 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846. The Government filed an Information pursuant to 21 USC 851 notifying Shannon he faced a mandatory minimum sentence of life pursuant to the then-current version of 21 USC 841(b)(1)(A) if convicted on Count 1. After conviction, the court sentenced Shannon to life. The court agreed with Shannon that his actual sentence is grossly disproportionate to the sentence he would receive today when he would no longer be subject to a mandatory minimum of life. The gist of Shannon's motion was gross disparity pursuant to USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). Shannon has maintained a commendable disciplinary record that demonstrates his capacity to conform his behavior to society's expectations. An unblemished disciplinary record is most compelling where a prisoner, like Shannon, has complied with the rules without any prospect of earning Good Time Credit. The court reduced Shannon’s life sentence to 360-months imprisonment.

CR.RIS/MEDICAL. The District of South Carolina granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Rayco Bethea, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212308 (D. S.C. Oct. 28, 2025). Bethea sought a reduction of his sentence to time-served based on his serious medical conditions. He asserted he has end stage kidney failure that requires dialysis three times a week. He asserted his medical conditions could be described as terminal illness so subsection (A) is applicable, presumably referring to USSG 1B1.13(A). He claimed his ailments rise to the level of terminal illness citing the following additional medical conditions: Lupus, anemia, secondary hyperthyroidism, GERD, obstructive sleep apnea, hypertension, and vitamin D deficiency. He also claimed his rehabilitation can be considered in combination with other circumstances in determining whether and to what extent a reduction in the defendant's term of imprisonment is warranted. The Government noted in its memorandum, ESRD (end-stage renal disease) is the final permanent stage of chronic kidney disease where kidney function has declined to the point where kidneys can no longer function on their own. The defendant has been receiving dialysis three times each week. The motion was granted, and his sentence was reduced to time served.

APPEAL/2255/IAC. The Second Circuit reversed and remanded Lavellous Purcell v. United States, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 28788 (2d Cir. Nov. 4, 2025). Purcell operated a commercial sex business from 2012 to 2017, recruiting women from across the United States to work as prostitutes, and the women involved traveled to at least fourteen states. The Government’s case focused on one victim, Samantha Vasquez, showing her work for Purcell in various locations, but not in the Southern District of New York. Purcell was indicted in 2018 in the Southern District of New York on five counts related to sex trafficking. After a jury trial, he was convicted on all counts and sentenced to 216 months’ imprisonment. On direct appeal the Second Circuit, his conviction on Count One (enticement to engage in unlawful sexual activity) was reversed for lack of venue in the Southern District of New York, but his conviction on Count Two (transporting a victim in interstate commerce to engage in prostitution) was affirmed because his appellate counsel did not challenge venue for that count. The district court reimposed the original sentence after remand. Purcell filed a habeas petition under 28 USC 2255, which the district court denied, finding appellate counsel’s performance reasonable. The Second Circuit held Purcell’s appellate counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to challenge venue as to Count Two, as the omitted argument was significant and obvious and likely would have resulted in reversal of that conviction. The court declined to apply the concurrent sentence doctrine and found Purcell was prejudiced by counsel’s omission. The Second Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of his 2255 petition and remanded for further proceedings.

APPEAL/ACCA. The Eleventh Circuit reversed and remanded United States v. Jerome Miller, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 28228 (11th Cir. Nov. 6, 2025). The case concerns a defendant who pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition after he and others entered a victim’s home, threatened him with a firearm, and stole his truck. When apprehended, law enforcement found ammunition on his person and a firearm in the stolen vehicle. The defendant had three prior Florida state convictions for delivery of cocaine, each involving small amounts sold to a confidential informant in early 2017. The Middle District of Florida sentenced the defendant to 180 months in prison, applying the ACCA enhancement. The court determined that his three Florida convictions for delivery of cocaine qualified as “serious drug offenses” under ACCA, using the version of Florida law in effect at the time of his convictions in August 2017, which excluded ioflupane from the definition of cocaine, thus matching federal law. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reviewed whether the ACCA enhancement was properly applied. The appellate court held that under Supreme Court precedent the relevant comparison for the categorical approach is between the state law in effect at the time the defendant committed the state offenses and the federal drug schedules in effect at that time. In early 2017, Florida law defined cocaine to include ioflupane, while federal law did not, making Florida’s definition broader than the federal definition. Because Florida’s saving provision prevented the later narrowing of the law from applying retroactively the mismatch remained. The Eleventh Circuit concluded the defendant’s Florida convictions did not qualify as ACCA predicates, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing without the ACCA enhancement.

APPEAL/BREACH PLEA AGREEMENT. The Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded United States v. Darell Trotter, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 28749 (5th Cir. Nov. 3, 2025). Trotter was charged with conspiracy to distribute fentanyl. Although the indictment alleged his conduct caused the death of an individual, DS, the plea agreement did not include this allegation. The agreement stipulated Trotter would be sentenced within the applicable range under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, but acknowledged the court was not bound by these stipulations. The presentence investigation report calculated a Guidelines range of 135–168 months, and recommended a sentence at the bottom of the range. Trotter initially objected to the report but withdrew his objections and agreed with the recommended sentence. At sentencing, the Government presented testimony from DS’s father and argued the Guidelines underrepresented the severity of Trotter’s conduct, urging the court to consider an upward variance. The Eastern District of Texas sentenced Trotter to 168 months’ imprisonment, the top of the Guidelines range, and five years of supervised release. The court did not reference the prosecutor’s remarks in its sentencing decision. Trotter appealed, arguing the Government breached the plea agreement by undermining the agreed-upon Guidelines range and advocating for a sentence above it. The Fifth Circuit reviewed the case under the plain error standard. The court found the Government breached the plea agreement by advocating for a sentence above the Guidelines range, that this breach affected Trotter’s substantial rights, and that correcting the error was necessary to preserve the fairness and integrity of judicial proceedings. The Fifth Circuit vacated the district court’s judgment and remanded the case, allowing Trotter to either seek specific performance of the plea agreement before a new judge or withdraw from the plea agreement.