Whether the First Circuit improperly refused to grant a sentence reduction under the First Step Act and failed to apply Concepcion v. United States precedent regarding sentencing guidelines recalibration

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether the First Circuit’s refusal to grant a sentence reduction under the First Step Act, despite intervening changes in sentencing law, conflicts with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Concepcion v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 2389 (2022), which requires courts to consider ali relevant factors, including recalibrated Sentencing Guidelines, when deciding motions for sentence reduction, and whether the First Circuit failure to apply this precedent during both the direct appeal and en banc rehearing, requires the Judgment be vacated, and the case be remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fisrt Circuit in further consideration in light of Concepcion v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 2389 (2022). Il. Whether the First Circuit committed a legal error by failing to recognize that 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B), the applicable statutory provision for Mr. Ayala-Vazquez’s offense involving 50 grams of crack cocaine, mandates a sentencing range of 5 to 40 years, and whether the imposition of a life sentence exceeded the statutory maximum, thus requiring modification under the First Step Act. Further, whether the appellate court improperly allowed the district court to rely on a superseding indictment that amended the drug quantities without a grand jury’s input, . in violation of constitutional requirements.