U.S. v. CARVER, 99-356(1)(DSD/JMM). (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Minnesota
Number: infdco20160112b62
Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 11, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 11, 2016
Summary: ORDER DAVID S. DOTY , District Judge . This matter is before the court upon the pro se motion by defendant Aaron Dale Carver for an order directing the Bureau of Prisons to change his release designation from Minneapolis, Minnesota to Tacoma, Washington. 1 The court must deny the motion because "the BOP has the exclusive authority to determine the location of a prisoner's release." United States v. Hartshorn, 163 F. App'x 325, 330 (5th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Voda, 994 F
Summary: ORDER DAVID S. DOTY , District Judge . This matter is before the court upon the pro se motion by defendant Aaron Dale Carver for an order directing the Bureau of Prisons to change his release designation from Minneapolis, Minnesota to Tacoma, Washington. 1 The court must deny the motion because "the BOP has the exclusive authority to determine the location of a prisoner's release." United States v. Hartshorn, 163 F. App'x 325, 330 (5th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Voda, 994 F...
More
ORDER
DAVID S. DOTY, District Judge.
This matter is before the court upon the pro se motion by defendant Aaron Dale Carver for an order directing the Bureau of Prisons to change his release designation from Minneapolis, Minnesota to Tacoma, Washington.1 The court must deny the motion because "the BOP has the exclusive authority to determine the location of a prisoner's release." United States v. Hartshorn, 163 F. App'x 325, 330 (5th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Voda, 994 F.2d 149, 151-52 (5th Cir. 1993) (observing that "only the Bureau of Prisons has the actual authority to designate the place of incarceration" because "the executive branch and not the judicial branch is responsible for administering sentences"); D'Amario v. Weiner, 2013 WL 5565773, at 4 (D.N.J. Oct. 8, 2013) (holding that the BOP had discretion to determine defendant's release location); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3624(d)(3) ("Upon the release of a prisoner . . . the Bureau of Prisons shall furnish the prisoner with . . . transportation to the place of the prisoner's conviction, to the prisoner's bona fide residence within the United States, or to such other place within the United States as may be authorized by the Director.").
Accordingly, based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion [ECF No. 370] is denied.
FootNotes
1. Defendant is scheduled to be released on January 29, 2026.
Source: Leagle
