Jurgen-Schultz v. Weiss

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that these sources “can constitute the appropriate standard,” but “conclud[ing] that the inquiry is multifaceted and must take into account the totality of the relevant circumstances”
• upholding district court’s determination that defendant’s asthma and high blood pressure did not present extraordinary and compelling reasons for his release during the pandemic
• “[W]e do not hold that only the Sentencing Guidelines commentary and BOP guidance can constitute the appropriate standard.”
• “[I]t is significant that the district judge who considered Hargrove’s motion for compassionate release was the same judge who had sentenced him in May 2018.”
• “[T]he court was not 15 USCA4 Appeal: 24-6432 Doc: 44 Filed: 05/12/2026 Pg: 16 of 19 imposing a sentence; it was being asked to reduce a sentence that was already legally imposed.”
• same, regarding evidence of clean disciplinary record and participation in various prison programs

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).