Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

USA v. Bost, 3:15-CR-00302-RJC-DSC. (2017)

Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina Number: infdco20171213f47 Visitors: 12
Filed: Dec. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2017
Summary: ORDER ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR. , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court upon letter of the defendant pro se regarding her restitution payments until she is released from federal custody. (Doc. No. 173). Apparently, the defendant is enrolled in the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program ("IFRP"). Participation in the IFRP is voluntary, and an inmate becomes eligible for certain benefits by her involvement in the program. 28 C.F.R. 545.11 et seq. A team at a prison facility consid
More

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon letter of the defendant pro se regarding her restitution payments until she is released from federal custody. (Doc. No. 173).

Apparently, the defendant is enrolled in the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program ("IFRP"). Participation in the IFRP is voluntary, and an inmate becomes eligible for certain benefits by her involvement in the program. 28 C.F.R. § 545.11 et seq. A team at a prison facility considers an inmate's financial information, monitors the amount of money in her trust account, and determines the required monthly payment for participation in the program.

Here, the Court ordered that payment of the defendant's criminal monetary penalties was due immediately and recommended participation in the IFRP. (Doc. No. 149: Judgment at 2, 6). Any balance outstanding at the time she begins her supervision is to be paid in installments of $50 per month to commence 60 days after her release from imprisonment. (Id. at 6). In her letter, the defendant complains that prison staff have based her IFRP payments on money contributed by family members and that a medical condition prevents her from fulfilling her job. (Doc. No. 173 at 1). However, the program does not require outside sources to contribute to the IFRP. 28 C.F.R. § 545.11(b). The defendant has the choice of whether to remain in the program, or can challenge its execution through administrative remedies.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, that the defendant's request to alter restitution payments through the IFRP (Doc. No. 173) is DENIED.

The Clerk is directed to certify copies of this order to the defendant, counsel for the defendant, to the United States Attorney, the United States Marshals Service, and the United States Probation Office.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer