United States v. Abel Rizo — 11th Cir. (Sep 30, 2026)

No. 24-11349 Argued September 30, 2026 Published October 9, 2026

We hear the government's appeal after a federal judge reduced a prisoner's sentence. The reduction rested on a change in law that did not automatically apply to older sentences. Prosecutors challenged the reduction, but the appeal faces another question: is the government legally allowed to bring it? Section thirty-five eighty-two allows a sentence reduction for extraordinary and compelling reasons, subject to other requirements. Section twelve ninety-one gives appeals courts power to review final district-court decisions. Section thirty-seven forty-two lists grounds for the government to appeal a sentence, including a sentence imposed unlawfully. The lawyers will debate how those statutes fit together in this case. Two terms will recur: waiver means intentionally giving up a known right or argument. Forfeiture means failing to preserve it. Here is the argument.

United States v. Abel Rizo (No. 24-11349) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued September 30, 2026.

Sources

Argument audio — Eleventh Circuit:https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/oral_argument_recordings/24-11349_09302026.mp3

Case and argument date — Eleventh Circuit:https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings?page=0

Rizo appeal and sentence-reduction background — Tate order, page8 footnote22 and page9:https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-gand-1_07-cr-00339/pdf/USCOURTS-gand-1_07-cr-00339-3.pdf

Sentence reductions — 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A):https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3582

Final-decision appellate jurisdiction — 28 U.S.C. §1291:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1291

Government sentencing appeals — 18 U.S.C. §3742(b):https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3742

Waiver and forfeiture — Wood v. Milyard, Supreme Court majority, footnote4:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/10-9995

0:00Introduction