United States v. Darius Whiting

Circuit 8Jul 21, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 73/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Darius Whiting’s motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Relying on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rutherford, the panel held that a non-retroactive change to 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1) does not constitute an extraordinary and compelling reason for a sentence reduction and agreed that the § 3553(a) factors weighed against relief.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether the sentencing disparity created by a non-retroactive change in sentencing law can constitute an "extraordinary and compelling reason" for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

Circuit Positions

Circuit 4Circuit 6Circuit 10

Non-retroactive sentencing disparity CAN qualify as an extraordinary and compelling reason for relief under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

Circuit 2Circuit 5Circuit 7Circuit 8(this circuit)Circuit 11

Non-retroactive sentencing disparity CANNOT qualify as an extraordinary and compelling reason for relief under § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

Conflict Summary

Several circuits had held that a defendant may invoke a non-retroactive change in the narcotics-sentencing statutes as an extraordinary and compelling reason for compassionate release, while other circuits—including the Eighth—concluded that Congress’s decision not to make the change retroactive forecloses treating the disparity as extraordinary. The Supreme Court’s 2026 decision in Rutherford v. United States resolved the disagreement by siding with the latter approach.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Darius Terrel Whiting
Appellee:United States