New York City Federal First Step Act and Compassionate Release Lawyer

The First Step Act reshaped how federal sentences are calculated, challenged, and in some cases, ended early. Passed in 2018 after decades of advocacy, it created real mechanisms for sentence reductions that did not exist before: expanded earned time credits, retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act, and a significantly broadened compassionate release pathway that no longer requires the Bureau of Prisons to act as a gatekeeper. For people serving long federal sentences, and for their families, understanding how these provisions actually work in practice is the difference between spending another decade behind bars and coming home. A New York City Federal First Step Act and compassionate release lawyer who knows how federal courts in this district apply these provisions can make that difference concrete.

The Southern and Eastern Districts of New York handle some of the most consequential federal criminal cases in the country. The judges who sit in those courts have developed their own body of rulings on First Step Act sentence modifications, compassionate release petitions, and the scope of “extraordinary and compelling” circumstances. What works in another district may not land the same way here. Judges vary in how they weigh the 18 U.S.C. Section 3553(a) factors on reconsideration, how they evaluate medical conditions, family circumstances, and post-sentencing rehabilitation, and what kind of record they want to see before granting relief. Building a petition for this specific court environment requires more than citing the statute. It requires understanding how this bench actually reads these motions.

Jason Goldman has practiced in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York as part of a criminal defense practice that spans every phase of federal litigation, from pre-arrest investigations through sentencing and appellate work. His background as a Brooklyn prosecutor gives him a granular understanding of how the government evaluates these petitions and where it decides to oppose or concede. That institutional knowledge matters in a proceeding where the prosecution’s response to your motion can shape the judge’s entire frame of reference.

What the First Step Act Actually Changed for Federal Prisoners

Before 2018, compassionate release existed on paper but rarely materialized in practice. The Bureau of Prisons controlled the process almost entirely. A prisoner had to persuade BOP to file a motion on their behalf, and BOP rarely did. The First Step Act changed that by allowing prisoners to file directly in federal court after exhausting administrative remedies or waiting 30 days after submitting a request to the warden, whichever comes first. That single procedural shift opened the courthouse door to a category of relief that had been functionally unavailable.

On the sentence reduction side, the Act made the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 retroactive, meaning people sentenced under pre-reform crack cocaine guidelines could petition for reduced sentences. It also expanded good-time credit calculations and created a new earned time credit system through programming and productive activities. These credits, once accumulated, can reduce the time a person spends in BOP custody, moving them earlier to supervised release or placement in a halfway house or home confinement. The mechanics of credit calculation under this framework are genuinely complex, and BOP does not always apply them correctly. Challenging a miscalculation requires knowing what the correct calculation should be.

Compassionate release petitions under the current framework ask the court to find that “extraordinary and compelling reasons” exist to reduce a sentence and that the Section 3553(a) factors support the reduction. Courts have significant discretion in defining what qualifies as extraordinary and compelling. Medical conditions, age, family circumstances, the length of time already served, post-sentencing conduct, and changes in law have all been accepted grounds in various circuits and districts. The Second Circuit, which covers New York, has addressed the scope of that discretion, and its holdings directly inform how petitions should be framed in SDNY and EDNY.

Shorten Prison Time with a Compassionate Release & the First Step Act Compassionate Release COVID-19 has impacted the federal prison system just as much, if not more, as it has all other industries. The First Step Act Enacted in 2018, the Fair Step Act represents unprecedented progressive, bi-partisan legislation. On a practical level, the Act put numerous provisions in place to facilitate an earlier release for qualifying federal inmates: Made the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 retroactive: Importantly, the First Step Act clarified some confusion stemming from the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act.

Common Grounds Federal Courts in New York Consider for Sentence Reduction

• Terminal or Serious Medical Conditions: Courts have consistently recognized that a serious medical condition that cannot be adequately managed within BOP facilities, or that substantially diminishes a person’s ability to care for themselves, can constitute extraordinary and compelling circumstances warranting release.
• Age and Deteriorating Health: Older individuals, particularly those who have served a substantial portion of their sentence and present diminished risk of recidivism, have a recognized pathway under the compassionate release framework, especially when age-related conditions compound health concerns.
• Retroactive Fair Sentencing Act Sentence Reductions: Individuals sentenced for crack cocaine offenses under pre-2010 guidelines who have not yet received a reduction may still be eligible to petition under the First Step Act’s retroactivity provision, depending on their specific offense conduct and prior litigation history.
• Family Circumstances: The incapacitation of a primary caregiver for minor children, or the death or incapacitation of the only other available caregiver, has been treated as a ground for compassionate release in courts across the Second Circuit.
• Earned Time Credit Disputes: Prisoners who complete qualifying programming and productive activities earn credits toward earlier release, but BOP’s application of credit eligibility rules has been contested in numerous cases; courts have jurisdiction to review these determinations.
• Unusually Long Sentences in Light of Current Law: Where a sentencing disparity has emerged because the law changed after someone was sentenced, some courts have treated that disparity as an extraordinary and compelling circumstance, particularly in the Second Circuit’s evolving framework.
• Post-Sentencing Rehabilitation: While not sufficient alone, courts may consider extraordinary rehabilitation alongside other grounds, and a documented record of education, programming, and institutional conduct can significantly strengthen a petition.

Building a First Step Act Petition That Actually Holds Up in Federal Court

The threshold question in any First Step Act petition is exhaustion. Before a court has jurisdiction to hear the motion, the incarcerated person must submit a request to the warden of the facility and either receive a denial or wait 30 days with no response. That request should not be treated as a formality. What is said in the administrative request can affect how the government responds in court, and a poorly framed request can create problems that didn’t need to exist. The process starts with that submission, and it should be approached with the same care as the court filing itself.

Medical records are central to most petitions grounded in health. BOP maintains medical records for every person in its custody, and those records can be requested and reviewed before filing. In cases where the condition is serious, independent medical evaluation by an outside expert can carry significant weight. Courts in the Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street in Manhattan, and the Eastern District of New York, at 225 Cadman Plaza East in Brooklyn, each have their own procedural practices around how they manage these motions, including whether they hold hearings or rule on the papers. Knowing which courthouse is handling the case and how that specific court handles these petitions operationally matters for how the motion is structured.

The government’s response is a critical stage. Federal prosecutors in the SDNY and EDNY are not required to concede any ground, and they often oppose compassionate release petitions on the merits and on the 3553(a) factors. Building a petition that anticipates the government’s likely arguments, addresses them directly, and puts the court in a position where it wants to grant relief requires thinking like an adversary while writing like an advocate. A reply brief may also be necessary if the government raises new factual assertions or legal arguments that require a response.

People making decisions about these petitions should also be aware of timing. If there is an appeal pending or other post-conviction proceedings underway, the relationship between those proceedings and a First Step Act motion can affect strategy. Similarly, for individuals who were sentenced on multiple counts or under a package sentence, the way a sentence reduction interacts with the overall structure of the original sentence requires careful analysis. These are not issues to work through casually.

The fifth factor, prior to the First Step Act, required that the individual have no more than one criminal history point, but the Act has now increased that number to four criminal history points. Limiting Prior Criminal History Impact: The Act has lowered the “851” enhancement for individuals with prior drug convictions. Your Defense Begins Now Motions and applications pursuant to compassionate release and the first step act are built on strong, concise, and convincing legal writing and advocacy.

Why The Law Offices of Jason Goldman for Federal Sentence Reduction Representation

Jason Goldman built his practice at the intersection of serious federal prosecution and serious federal defense. His time as a Brooklyn prosecutor gave him direct experience with how the government prioritizes cases, evaluates risk, and decides where to invest resources in opposing post-conviction litigation. When he transitioned to private defense, he carried that institutional perspective into a practice that now spans pre-arrest investigation, trials, sentencing, and appellate work. He has tried over 25 cases to verdict and has represented clients at every level of the federal criminal process. Bar admissions in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York reflect where this work actually happens.

The firm has represented clients across a range of backgrounds and industries, including executives, professionals, and individuals from all walks of life who find themselves navigating the federal system. For clients in highly sensitive situations, Goldman has demonstrated the ability to manage both the legal proceeding and the surrounding context, including how information is managed publicly and privately. That discretion matters to many families pursuing compassionate release for a loved one who may have a public profile or whose case attracted significant attention at trial. Goldman has been recognized as one of New York City’s prominent federal criminal defense attorneys and has been named a New York Super Lawyers Rising Star. He is a member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the New York City Bar Association, where he serves on the Criminal Courts Committee.

Answers to What Families and Defendants Most Want to Know

What is the 30-day exhaustion rule and how does it work?

Before filing a compassionate release motion in federal court, the incarcerated person must submit a request to the warden of their BOP facility. If the warden denies the request or 30 days pass without a decision, the person may then file directly in federal court. Courts have interpreted this requirement strictly in some cases and more flexibly in others, so understanding how the relevant district applies it before filing is important.

Who qualifies for a retroactive Fair Sentencing Act reduction?

Individuals sentenced for crack cocaine offenses who received sentences under pre-2010 guidelines may be eligible, but eligibility depends on the specific offense conduct, whether a prior motion was filed, and how the court applies the statutory text. Not every crack cocaine case qualifies automatically, and the sentencing record needs to be reviewed carefully to determine whether a reduction is available and what range it might produce.

How does a court decide what counts as “extraordinary and compelling” circumstances?

Congress delegated that determination largely to the courts after the First Step Act removed the Sentencing Commission’s prior application note as the exclusive definition. The Second Circuit has addressed the scope of district court discretion in this area. Courts look at the totality of the circumstances, meaning that multiple factors that are each insufficient alone may be sufficient in combination. The framing of the petition and the record submitted matter enormously.

Does the government always oppose compassionate release petitions?

Not always. In some cases, particularly those involving serious terminal illness or situations where the original sentence was very long and significant time has been served, the government may concede that extraordinary circumstances exist and focus its opposition solely on the 3553(a) factors. In others, it opposes the motion entirely. Knowing how the SDNY or EDNY typically handles specific categories of petitions can inform the litigation strategy before a motion is even filed.

What Section 3553(a) factors does the court examine on a compassionate release motion?

Courts consider the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history and characteristics of the defendant, the seriousness of the offense, deterrence, protection of the public, and the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities, among others. Even if extraordinary circumstances are established, a court can deny relief if it concludes that these factors counsel against early release. Building a record around these factors, through evidence of rehabilitation, risk assessment, and reentry plans, is a core part of the petition.

Can earned time credits be challenged if BOP calculated them incorrectly?

Yes. Federal courts have jurisdiction to review BOP’s application of earned time credits under the First Step Act, and prisoners have successfully challenged miscalculations through habeas corpus proceedings or other motions. The eligibility rules for which offenses qualify for credit and how credits convert to time are technical, and BOP does not always apply them uniformly. A legal review of the credit calculation can identify whether a challenge is warranted.

What happens if the court denies a compassionate release motion?

A denial is not necessarily the end. Courts can deny without prejudice, meaning a new motion may be filed if circumstances change. An appeal of a denial can also be taken to the Second Circuit if there are legal errors in the district court’s ruling, such as failure to adequately address the extraordinary circumstances or misapplication of the 3553(a) factors. Whether to appeal or file a renewed motion depends on the reason for the denial and the underlying record.

Can a First Step Act petition affect supervised release conditions even if the prison term itself is not shortened?

In some cases, courts have addressed the terms of supervised release in the context of a sentence reduction proceeding, particularly if the original conditions were tied to circumstances that have changed. Whether this is available in a specific case depends on the structure of the original sentence and what relief is being requested. It is worth examining whether a broader form of relief beyond raw sentence reduction is achievable.

How long does the federal court process typically take on these motions?

In the SDNY and EDNY, timelines vary by judge and by how the government responds. Some courts rule relatively quickly on the papers; others schedule conferences or request supplemental submissions. In emergency situations involving serious medical deterioration, courts have expedited review, but that requires demonstrating the emergency credibly. Planning for a realistic timeline while preserving the ability to seek expedited treatment when circumstances warrant is part of how these cases need to be managed.

Does it matter which BOP facility someone is housed in when filing a petition in New York?

Jurisdiction for a compassionate release motion lies with the sentencing court, not the district where the prison is located. So a person sentenced in the Southern District of New York who is now housed in a federal facility elsewhere still petitions the SDNY. This is different from habeas corpus proceedings under 28 U.S.C. Section 2241, which are filed in the district where the person is confined. Knowing which procedural vehicle applies and where to file is foundational to getting the motion before the right court.

Serving Federal Clients Across New York City and the Surrounding Region

The Law Offices of Jason Goldman represents clients in federal proceedings across New York City and the broader region. The firm’s work in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York covers clients from every neighborhood in Manhattan, from the Upper West Side through Midtown, Chelsea, and Lower Manhattan, as well as clients from Brooklyn neighborhoods including Crown Heights, Flatbush, Bushwick, Bay Ridge, and Williamsburg. Queens communities including Flushing, Jamaica, Astoria, and Forest Hills are also regularly served, as are clients from the Bronx, Staten Island, and Harlem. Beyond the five boroughs, the firm represents clients in federal matters with connections to Westchester County, Nassau County, Suffolk County, and the broader Hudson Valley region. For matters in other federal jurisdictions around the country, pro hac vice admission allows Goldman to step in on significant cases outside New York. Families coordinating these efforts from out of state, often because their loved one is housed at a distant BOP facility while the sentencing court remains in New York, are also well served by this geographic flexibility.

New York City Federal Compassionate Release Attorney – Start This Conversation Now

Federal sentences are long. BOP facilities are far from home. The First Step Act created real pathways to reduce that time, but those pathways require a petition that is built correctly, filed in the right court, and argued with an understanding of how federal judges in New York actually approach these motions. A New York City federal compassionate release attorney who has spent a career in these courts, on both sides of the courtroom, is positioned to give you an honest assessment of what is achievable and build the strongest available case for relief. Contact The Law Offices of Jason Goldman to discuss your situation directly with an attorney who will evaluate the record and tell you what you are actually working with.