Whether a district court complies with Concepcion v. United States when deciding a First Step Act motion

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a district court, when deciding a First Step Act motion on the pleadings, complies with Concepcion v. United States,’ when it fails to calculate the benchmark Guidelines range or acknowledge the movant’s arguments in favor of relief and states only that it is denying the motion based upon the government’s arguments? 2. Whether a court should grant an appellant’s motion to supplement the record where the supplemental evidence is needed to establish prejudice on appeal? 3. Whether Leonel Marin Torres was denied the effective assistance of counsel where he did not wish to be represented by the attorney appointed to file a First Step Act motion on his behalf, and the motion was filed against his wishes? 4, Whether the attorney’s continued representation of Marin Torres, without Marin Torres’s knowledge and against Marin Torres’s stated wishes, violated his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself? 1142 S. Ct. 2389 (2022). i 5. Whether Marin Torres is entitled to equitable relief under the extraordinary circumstance of counsel failing to communicate with Marin Torres, act in accordance with his reasonable directive, or keep him informed of key developments in the case? ii