IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
In the matter of
DISTRICT PROTOCOL FOR MISCELLANEOUS
PROCESSING APPLICATIONS UNDER GENERAL ORDER
GUIDELINES AMENDMENT 821 NO. 23-07
The U.S. Sentencing Commission has recommended retroactive application
of Parts A and B, Subpart 1, of Amendment 821. See U.S.S.G. App. C., amend.
No. 825; U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10, p.s. (effective Nov. 1, 2023 and operative Feb. 1,
2024). As the Commission estimates that dozens of already-sentenced defendants
in this District may qualify for a reduced sentence under the retroactive changes,
standard procedures are necessary for processing the expected large number of
applications for resentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10.
Following consultation among the Court, the U.S. Attorney, U.S. Probation, the
defense bar, and the Clerk of Court, the Court adopts the following protocol for
implementing Amendment 821.
1. Intake and Identification of Candidates for Reduction. The Court appoints
the Federal Public Defender for the District of Alaska (FPD) to represent
initially all potentially eligible candidates sentenced in the District of Alaska.
FPD will maintain a central, master-list database of potential candidates
derived from multiple source lists, defendants that file pro se motions with
the court, and of defendants who have individually contacted the Court, the
U.S. Attorney, U.S. Probation, FPD, or CJA panel members inquiring about
eligibility for this reduction. FPD will review the master list for facially
ineligible cases and then contact the remaining candidates to inform them
of the Amendment 821 process in the District and to solicit additional
information to conduct initial screening. The intake packet to be returned by
defendants will include an advisal and waiver of conflict with FPD for the
limited purposes of conducting a screening for eligibility and possibly
entering into a joint recommendation for a reduction. If, at any point, FPD
believes an unwaivable conflict prevents further representation, FPD will
obtain alternative counsel from CJA panel members who volunteer for this
purpose.
2. Initial Screening of Candidates. FPD will use information provided by the
candidates in their intake packets and materials provided by Probation to
conduct an initial screening for eligibility. Probation, as a centralized source,
will provide FPD and U.S. Attorney representatives, upon request, sealed
copies of the presentence reports, criminal history reports, addendums, the
parties' sentencing summary charts, and the Statement of Reasons from
sentencing for requested cases. The Clerk of Court is also authorized to
provide sentencing documents and docket reports to FPD and U.S. Attorney
representatives, upon request, so that they may conduct the initial screening
process. In cases involving substantial assistance where FPD did not
2
represent the defendant, and FPD believes a review of the substance of the
assistance is necessary, FPD will consult with the USAO. If there is
disagreement as to whether the conflict prevents further representation, the
issue will be raised with the original sentencing judge and sealed materials
will not be accessed without the Court's approval. FPD will process first
those individuals whose scheduled and revised release dates place them
closest to the operative date of February 1, 2024, so that qualifying
candidates obtain the full reduction due. FPD will notify those on the master
list it determines are ineligible and advise those for whom a reduction would
be disadvantageous overall.
3. Consultation and Review by the U.S. Attorney. On a periodic basis, to be
determined by the representatives of each agency, FPD will transmit to the
designated representatives of the U.S. Attorney a list of candidates it has
determined to be eligible for retroactive reduction, and pro se motions
regardless of eligibility. The representatives of the U.S. Attorney will review
the candidates and pro se motions and classify them into three categories:
(a) cases approved for joint recommendation for reduction, (b) cases that
are contested and, (c) individuals who do not qualify for appointed counsel
or have an unwaivable conflict with FPD.
4. Processing of Cases After Consultation and Review. All cases – joint
recommendations and contested cases – will be assigned to the original
sentencing judge for calendaring in due course. For those in the third
3
category, FPD will contact the individuals and inform them of their options to
proceed pro se, obtain alternative counsel (including CJA panel members
who volunteer for this purpose or to take conflict cases), or rely on a
suggestion from the U.S. Attorney or sua sponte action of the Court in cases
that would otherwise be jointly recommended for reduction. These cases will
then be assigned and calendared accordingly. FPD will also contact
individuals who have filed pro se motions to inform them whether their case
qualifies for a joint motion or will be contested by the government, and
options to proceed pro se or obtain counsel.
(a) Cases qualifying for a joint recommendation after consultation and
review will have a standard joint motion filed after notices of
appearance have been filed in those cases. The standard motion
must set out the information required to enter a reduced sentence,
including the original sentence and Guidelines range, the basis for
qualification under Amendment 821, and the new Guidelines
calculation and sentence to be entered by application of the two-level
reduction or reduction of Criminal History Category.
(b) Cases that have been placed on the contested track will be
calendared for briefing and hearings as required to dispose of the
matter. FPD will continue to represent candidates in contested cases,
unless the case involves an unwaivable conflict, financial ineligibility
requires FPD to withdraw from the case, or FPD determines that the
4
Court can decide a pro se motion on the existing record without further
assistance of counsel.
5. Disposition of Motions for Reduction. The assigned judge may summarily
grant the joint motion. If the matter is contested, or the Court is inclined not
to grant the joint motion, the Court will order further briefing and may set a
hearing. If a motion for reduction is granted, the judge will enter a new
judgment and commitment order in that case using form AO 247 and
indicating the effective date of the order as February 1, 2024, if that date is
later than the date of the entry of the order.
6. Timeline. The representatives will endeavor to complete screening, review,
and filing of motions by the February 1, 2024, operative date. For cases
where the projected new release date falls later than the operative date, the
representatives will prioritize cases with earlier release dates for processing,
presenting them to the Court at appropriate intervals to permit entry of new
judgments in all identified cases in due course.
7. The Presentence Reports and Statement of Reasons forms provided to
counsel, and any materials reviewed pursuant to the enhanced electronic
access provided in paragraph 2, may not be disclosed to anyone, or used
for any purpose other than investigating and handling motions for reduction
of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10.
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 1st day of December, 2023, at Anchorage Alaska.
/s/ Sharon L. Gleason
SHARON L. GLEASON
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DISTRICT OF ALASKA
Distribution:
District Judges Magistrate Judges
Clerk of the Court Court Librarian
Court Rules Attorney U.S. Probation & Pretrial Services
U.S. Marshal U.S. Attorney
Federal Public Defender
6
