Filed: Aug. 29, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 29, 2018
Summary: ORDER ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR. , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the defendant, pro se, requesting that the Court recommend nine to twelve months' placement in a residential reentry center pursuant to the Second Chance Act. (Doc. No. 152). Title 18, United States Code, Section 3624(c) allows the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to place a prisoner in pre-release custody under conditions, including home confinement, for the last portion of her sentence to prepare her fo
Summary: ORDER ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR. , District Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the defendant, pro se, requesting that the Court recommend nine to twelve months' placement in a residential reentry center pursuant to the Second Chance Act. (Doc. No. 152). Title 18, United States Code, Section 3624(c) allows the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to place a prisoner in pre-release custody under conditions, including home confinement, for the last portion of her sentence to prepare her for..
More
ORDER
ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR., District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the defendant, pro se, requesting that the Court recommend nine to twelve months' placement in a residential reentry center pursuant to the Second Chance Act. (Doc. No. 152).
Title 18, United States Code, Section 3624(c) allows the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to place a prisoner in pre-release custody under conditions, including home confinement, for the last portion of her sentence to prepare her for re-entry into the community. The Second Chance Act of 2007, among other things, expanded the allowable time period for pre-release custody from six to twelve months, but limits the time in home confinement to six months. Pub. L. No. 110-199, § 251, 122 Stat. 657, 692-93 (2008). The Act clearly states that it does not alter the BOP's authority to designate the place of the prisoner's imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 3621, and prohibits a court from ordering that a sentence be served in a community confinement facility. Id.
Although the Court appreciates the defendant's desire to make a successful transition back into society, the BOP is in a better position to consider the most appropriate resources for her. United States v. Evans, 159 F.3d 908, 912 (4th Cir. 1998) (authority to designate place of confinement vested in BOP).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the defendant's motion (Doc. No. 152) is DENIED.
The Clerk is directed to certify copies of this order to the defendant, counsel for the defendant, the United States Attorney, and the United States Marshal.