Tag Archives: FTC

Detainers No Longer Disqualify Some FSA Credit Application – Update for February 13, 2023

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FSA CREDIT BLUES

BOP Cries ‘Uncle’ On Detainer FSA Credit: As of a week ago, at least six district courts had granted habeas corpus petitions filed by prisoners denied use of FSA credits because they had detainers.

uncle230213FSA credits, for those folks tuning in late, are credits awarded to federal prisoners under the First Step Act for the prisoners successfully completing Bureau of Prisons programs that have been determined to reduce the risk of recidivism, such as GED classes, anger management, parenting skills, and drug/alcohol rehabilitation.  Prisoners may use the credits to reduce their sentences by up to one year or to get more time in halfway house or home confinement at the end of their sentences.

Despite the fact that Congress wrote detailed instructions into the law about what prisoners were to be excluded from earning FSA credits, the BOP took it upon itself to decide that other classes of prisoners – specifically those with detainers on file from state authorities or federal immigration officials – could not earn FSA credits. Unsurprisingly, a number of inmates filed petitions for habeas corpus with federal courts challenging the BOP’s unauthorized tinkering with the statutory scheme.

Last week, facing the reality that the detailed eligibility requirements Congress wrote into the FSA credit program prevents the BOP from adding its own spin to the standards as a matter of law, the Bureau abandoned its efforts to deny people with detainers the right to reduce their sentence length with FSA credits.

In a supplement to the November 2022 program statement on FSA credits issued last Monday, the BOP issued an updated P.S. 5410.01 deleting requirement that inmates have no detainers or unresolved pending charges, to include unresolved immigration status, in order to use FSA credits to shorten their sentences. Prior to the BOP program statement on FSA credits issued last November, the BOP had ruled that people with detainers or unresolved state charges were ineligible for any FSA credits. In November, the BOP moderated its position, holding that people with detainers could earn FSA credits but not spend them unless they cleared up the detainers.

Last week’s announcement wipes out any BOP resistance to people with detainers getting to apply up to 365 FSA credit to reduce their sentence length by up to a year. The only people ineligible now because of detainers are noncitizens “subject of a final order of removal under immigration laws.” And that is practically no one in the system.

A detainer will still prevent inmates from using FSA credits for halfway house or home confinement. Whether First Step’s detailed exclusions from credit override the BOP’s traditional refusal to give halfway house and home confinement to people with detainers has yet to be decided.

elsa230213PATTERN Recidivism Score Frozen on Prerelease Custody: Last week’s changes also clarify that if a prisoner has had two regular program reviews (which occur annually or more often as a prisoner approaches the end of the sentence) at which the PATTERN score was reviewed before going to halfway house or home confinement, he or she will not be reassessed again. In other words, the recidivism score you take out the prison door with you will remain yours as long as you’re in BOP custody (which you are at halfway house or on home confinement… If you go to prerelease custody before you’ve had two reassessments, however, you’ll be reassessed while you’re in halfway house or home confinement.

This should not be terribly significant unless the BOP is gearing up to start awarding FSA credits for programming and productive activities while in halfway house or on home confinement. The BOP promised this over a year ago, but nothing has happened yet to implement it.

Look Ma, No Hands!: The changes also provide that “FSA Time Credit Assessments (FTC Worksheets) will be automatically uploaded to the Inmate Central File during each auto-calculation. Inmates will be provided a copy of the most recent FTC Worksheet during regularly scheduled program reviews.”

There’s some advantage to taking the input and uploading away from case managers, in that it assures uniformity and correct calculation. On the other hand, as a lot of people have already experienced, it complicates and extends the process for getting errors corrected.

Groundhog Day at DSCC: Speaking of errors, a memorandum from the BOP’s administrator of the Residential Reentry Management Branch issued last week announced yet another nationwide re-calculation of FSA credits over the past weekend.

groundhogday230213The memo predicts “several hundred immediate releases affecting community placements, as well as the need to advance [halfway house and] home confinement dates and initiate new referrals to the Residential Reentry Office.”  Those releases should be happening between this morning and Wednesday.

The automatic calculation of FSA credits was first promised August 1, 2022, then was effective October 1, 2022, only to collapse in a heap of withdrawn credits and miscalculated dates. It was then to be fixed by January 9, and then January 23, and then February 6…

I keep hearing Sonny and Cher singing…

P.S. 5410.01CN, First Step Act of 2018 – Time Credits: Procedures for Implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4) (February 6, 2023)

BOP, Retroactive Application of First Step Act Time Credits (February 9, 2023)

– Thomas L. Root

ETC FUBAR at BOP, As New Director Search Finally Over – Update for June 16, 2022

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

BOP: DON’T CALL US, WE’LL CALL YOU ON EARNED TIME CREDIT CALCULATION

If there is a common refrain in emails coming into this Newsletter in the past several months, it is that inmates are not getting their earned-time-credit calculations from their Unit Teams.

don'tcallus220616A recap: The First Step Act authorized the award of credits to inmates who successfully complete programs that have been found to reduce recidivism. The acronym-crazy government calls them “EBRRs,” that is, “evidence-based recidivism reduction” programs. Inmates could receive “earned time credits” (ETCs) that will reduce their prison time up to a year, grant them more halfway house or home  confinement, and even get them more phone time and commissary.

(Confusingly, the government called ETCs “FTCs” for awhile – “federal time credits” – but seems to have settled on the preferred terminology now).

Inmates are classified using a system called PATTERN according to their likelihood of recidivism.  As they complete programs, age, and behave, their PATTERN score decreases, increasing the number of ETCs they may receive.

So all is roses in the BOP. Inmates are happily earning ETCs, the staff is contentedly helping prisoners forsake their prior evil ways…

FUBAR220616Right. In fact, implementation of ETCs (and awarding time off) is becime a FUBAR.

Last week, Walter Pavlo reported in Forbes on an internal BOP memo acknowledging the frustration:

Institutions are likely getting a lot of calls from outside family members and/or questions from the inmates themselves. We ask that you refrain from referring inmates or their family members to the DSCC or Central Office. As we move toward a fully automated auto-calculation process for the calculating and awarding of FTCs, neither the DSCC nor the Corrections Programs Branch are directly involved in the process.

Forbes said the memo directed institutions to give inmates and their family members a “canned response” asking “for their patience” during the implementation of an automated credit calculation system:

While all eligible inmates are able to earn credits, the Agency is prioritizing those inmates who are within 24 months of their Statutory Release date and eligible to both earn and apply Federal Time Credits. The Agency is in the final stages of development and testing of an auto-calculation app, and once finalized all eligible inmates will have their records updated and the Federal Time applied consistently with the Federal Rules language.

Late breaking news: The BOP has finally found someone who will admit to being considered for the director’s slot, replacing Michael Carvajal (whom Sen. Richard Durbin [D-IL] wants to usher into retirement as quickly as possible). 

Could MIke Carvajal finally be leaving the building?
Could MIke Carvajal finally be leaving the building?

The Oregon Capital Chronicle reported yesterday that Colette Peters, director of Oregon’s prison system, confirmed to the paper that she is a finalist for the BOP Director’s job.

She has been director of the Oregon Department of Corrections since 2012, where she is in charge of  4,400 employees and 12,124 prisoners.

As director of the Oregon prison system, she changed the agency’s reference to “inmates.” Oregon’s prisoners became “adults in custody.”

Forbes, As Biden Touts Action On First Step Act, Federal Prisoners Await Action From Bureau Of Prisons (June 4, 2022)

Oregon Capital Chronicle, Oregon’s prison director a finalist to lead federal prison system (June 15, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Balancing Accounts For Unused ETC Credits – Update for June 2, 2022

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

DYER STRAITS

Three and a half years ago, the First Step Act became law amid great fanfare. One of the many provisions that held great promise for all concerned was the incentive-based programming scheme, that would let federal inmates earn credits that reduced their sentences for successful completion of programs designed to address their needs.

Such a program would reduce recidivism by ex-felons, thus benefitting both them and society.

mismanagement210419Trust the Federal Bureau of Prisons to turn a high-minded program into a furball. The BOP required almost two years to propose detailed rules for the implementation of the “earned time credit” program, rules which – by the way – were draconian in their application and reasonably calculated to strangle the ETC program before it began.

It took another 14 months (and a new Administration) for the BOP to finally adopt the rules, which rules – mercifully enough – did an about-face from what was proposed. But those rules, which among other things retroactively credited inmates with credit back to the day the First Step Act passed, created a whole new raft of problems.

Problems for people like Doug Dyer.  Doug was on CARES Act home confinement in December 2021 when he filed a petition for habeas corpus, demanding immediate release due to the application of First Step Act earned-time credits to which he claimed entitlement. The BOP had not yet adopted the new rules, and predictably, told the judge that Doug had nothing coming.

nothingcoming181018But a month after Doug’s filing the BOP adopted the final ETC rules. Doug (and thousands of other inmates) were credited with 540 ETC days. The same day the rules were adopted, the BOP granted Doug immediate release from home confinement (51 days before his normal release date). The government then moved to dismiss the habeas corpus as being moot, because Doug had gotten what he wanted.

Doug opposed the government’s motion, arguing that because only he could only use 51 days of credit out of the 540 he was awarded, he should get to use the balance to reduce his supervised release time.

The district court agreed, reducing his supervised release by 489 days. The court ruled “the relevant statutory provision provides that ‘[t]ime credits earned under this paragraph by prisoners who successfully participate in recidivism reduction programs or productive activities shall be applied toward time in… supervised release’. 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(C). Therefore, the unambiguous, mandatory language of the statute provides that earned-time credits may be applied to a term of supervised release.”

So Doug got a year and a half off his supervised release time (about half of what he was to serve).

I generally don’t criticize a good pro-prisoner decision like this one, but Doug’s court is just plain wrong. The Court hung its hat on 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(C), which says

Time credits earned under this paragraph by prisoners who successfully participate in recidivism reduction programs or productive activities shall be applied toward time in prerelease custody or supervised release. The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall transfer eligible prisoners, as determined under section 3624(g), into prerelease custody or supervised release.

There's nothing like getting your facts straight, Your Honor ...
There’s nothing like getting your facts straight, Your Honor… or the law, for that matter.

The District Court read this to mean that ETCs could be used to reduce the period of incarceration or supervised release. But the remainder of the subsection not only makes it clear that the term “supervised release” is being used as the alternative to “prerelease custody,” and that the subsection is to be read with reference to 18 U.S.C. § 3624(g).

And here’s the problem. Subsection 3624(g)(3) authorizes the Director of the BOP to “transfer the prisoner to begin any such term of supervised release at an earlier date, not to exceed 12 months, based on the application of time credits under section 3632.”  It does not authorize the Director to reduce the term of supervised release at all.

Read in conjunction with § 3624(g)(3), it’s pretty clear that § 3632(d)(4)(C)’s reference to “shall be applied toward time in prerelease custody or supervised release” is intended to mean the three options the BOP has for applying ETC credits: more halfway house or home confinement (the “prerelease custody” option) or release from custody up to 12 months early to begin one’s supervised release.

puzzled171201Given that no statute authorizes the BOP to reduce a prisoner’s supervised release, it’s hard to figure how a district court can grant habeas corpus to in essence demand that the BOP do so.

No matter. Doug’s supervised release was cut in half. But I strongly doubt that this decision will influence any other district court to do the same for the small subset of inmates in Doug’s position.

The opinion has not been picked up by LEXIS.

Order (ECF 16), Dyer v. Fulgam, Case No. 1:21-cv-299 (E.D. Tenn. May 20, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Did the BOP’s New ETC Rules Get Hijacked By Biden? – Update for January 18, 2022

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

THE UNSEEN HAND WRITES NEW BOP EARNED TIME RULES?

The Federal Bureau of Prisons last week announced final rules for granting federal time credits (“FTCs”) to inmates who successfully complete specified programs designed to reduce recidivism or engage in what the statute calls “productive activities.”

In November 2020, the BOP finally got around to proposing rules for granting FTCs under the incentives program authorized two years before in the First Step Act. The agency proposed a rule that would require 240 classroom hours of successful programming in order for an inmate to receive a mere 15 days credit on his or her sentence. At the time, I said, “In the BOP, a 500-hour program takes 12-18 months to complete. That may seem like a fairly substantial commitment for a month more of home confinement. But it is consistent with what we’ve come to expect from the BOP: given a chance to interpret the extent of its authority to be lenient, it invariably interprets that authority in the most chary way possible.”

[Editor’s note: Yes, I said “most chary.” My wife the grammarian, has since pointed out that the superlative of “chary” is “chariest.” I’d fire her, but she’s been right too many times before.]

icecreamsundae210118In my experience practicing administrative law back in the day, when an agency rolled out proposed rules in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for public comment, the final product looked a lot like what had been proposed, perhaps with a tweak here and there. Once in a blue moon, an agency might back off after an especially loud and sustained hue and cry from the industry and public, but rulemaking was a lot like ordering an ice cream sundae – you could specify which sprinkle, nuts, sauce, and cherry you wanted on it, but the 95% of it that was ice cream was fixed and was not going to change.

The history of agency rulemaking since the passage of the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 makes what happened to the FTC rules so puzzling. It’s like the BOP specified an ice cream sundae, but delivered a cup of mashed potatoes and gravy instead.

The new rules, already being applied to hundreds if not thousands of inmates, represent a total repudiation of the BOP’s proposed rules announced a year ago.

I reported on the changes in the rules – the “what” – last Friday. What I didn’t talk about was the “why.” Even now, I am unsure of what caused the sea change at the BOP, but there are some hints. Traditionally, the BOP director has scrambled to imprint any favorable program with his or her initials. Yet, last week, BOP Director Michael Carvajal was strangely silent, while Attorney General Merrick Garland took a victory lap in a press release. The fact that the Attorney General issued a statement supporting the new rules, but Carvajal did not, suggests that the Biden DOJ grabbed hold of the FTC process after the BOP sought to impose Draconian limitations on the program.

sycophant220118Several members of Congress – such as Richard Durbin (D-IL), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), John Cornyn, (R-TX) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), on the Senate side, and Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), on the House side – criticized the proposed rules in public comments. That may have played a factor as well. The BOP’s report adopting the final rule mentioned their comments, such as this excerpt from Sens. Whitehouse’s and Cornyn’s filing:

The proposed rule’s definition of a “day” of program participation does not adequately reward engagement with [EBBR programs] and PAs consistent with the First Step Act. . . Because BOP programs do not run for eight hours per day, the proposed rule would require individuals to attend an EBRR or PA for several calendar days before they earned a full “day” of time credit. . . It was not our intent as drafters of the legislation that BOP define a “day” in this way. Nor did Congress ever consider it. . . The proposed rule’s narrow definition of a “day” does not adequately incentivize program participation and reduce recidivism as intended by the First Step Act.

The fact that the legislators’ comments were singled out approvingly – maybe even fawningly – in the report would permit a reasonable person to infer that the BOP was sending the two Judiciary Committees a message that their concerns were being addressed.

The Hill noted that the new rules were announced “just one week after the DOJ revealed that BOP Director Michael Carvajal would be resigning from his post. He had faced criticism during his time as chief of the bureau.” Fox News said “the Biden administration has faced increased pressure from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers to do more to put in place additional aspects of the First Step Act, and the bureau has been accused of dragging its feet.” Associated Press observed that the final rules came “about two months after the department’s inspector general sounded an alarm that the Bureau of Prisons had not applied the earned time credits to about 60,000 federal inmates who had completed the programs.”

It seemed strange that several media outlets connected the Director’s departure with the release of the rules. It is fair to note that there is no logical reason for his announcing the retirement on January 6th, especially when the actual date was left open (he said he would stay on until a new director is appointed). The timing, as The Hill implied, may be linked to the dramatic turn in the BOP’s approach to FTCs.

bidensuperman210201

Likewise, Fox News may have settled on another reason. President Biden has taken a lot of heat recently for doing nothing on criminal justice reform. Probably because he has done nothing. Hijacking the rules and rewriting them the way Congressional Democrats would love and Congressional Republicans would accept may have been seen by the White House as a cheap fix: liberal FTC rules did not require Congressional approval and conservatives could hardly complain, because all Biden was doing was carrying forward a program President Trump proudly owned, the First Step Act.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not complaining that the BOP did the right thing. I’m puzzled, that’s all.

Associated Press, Thousands of federal inmates to be released under 2018 law (January 13, 2022)

Dept of Justice, Justice Department Announces New Rule Implementing Federal Time Credits Program Established by the First Step Act (January 13, 2022)

BOP, Final Rules for Federal Time Credits Program (January 13, 2022)

BOP, FSA Time Credits (January 13, 2022)

The Hill, Thousands of federal inmates being released this week under law signed by Trump (January 13, 2022)

Fox News, Federal inmates to be released under ‘time credits’ program (January 13, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Bear Hunting – Update for November 19, 2020

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

SOME DAYS YOU GET THE BEAR…

billybear201119Billy Walters, convicted of insider trading charges in 2017, has filed a Bivens action against five law enforcement officials – including former SDNY US Attorney Preet Bharara – seeking a holding that his due process rights were violated when agents leaked confidential grand jury material to The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, intended to “tickle the wire” by enticing investigation targets to implicate themselves on wiretaps. The leaks continued for more than a year, with 13 different stories about the investigation.

(A Bivens action, for those who are joining us late, is an action for money damages alleging that federal agents or employees violated one’s constitutional rights. It is so named for the case establishing the right – now rapidly being diminished – that case being Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), in which Mr. Bivens sued federal drug agents who kicked down his door, searched his apartment, and arrested him without a warrant for a drug crime that was never prosecuted).

Billy’s lawyers complained about the leaks at the time, but the US Attorney denounced the complaints as “false’’ and “baseless accusations that are undermined by the facts.’’ Only after the judge permitted Billy some discovery into there origin of the leaks did the US Attorney change his tune, admitting that a senior FBI agent had in fact leaked information and would be punished for it.

But evidence provided to the court showed that Bharara himself, along with a team of five other top prosecutors under him, were aware for two years that the FBI was leaking false information about Billy to the press. “While expressing outrage in selected emails shared with the court,” Forbes reported, “Bharara and his team appeared to do nothing to actually halt the activity.”  The FBI agent was severely lashed with a wet noodle, and retired with full benefits a few years later.

Billy’s judge expressed shock (although not enough shock to acquit Billy):

Mr. Walters is charged with, among other things, tipping material non-public information to another. And to help support that case, the special agent apparently tipped material non-public information improperly to another. That’s what we have here.

The 2nd Circuit later observed that the leaking of confidential grand jury testimony was “serious misconduct and, indeed, likely criminal’’ and “in some respects more egregious than anything Walters did.”

Billy’s complaint, filed by two law firms, seeks compensatory and punitive damages, and a declaration that Billy’s rights were trampled by the US Attorney and his minions.

Billy may have gotten the bear…

Real Clear Politics, Fighting Prosecutorial Leaks (November 11, 2020)

Forbes, Billy Walters Files Lawsuit Against FBI Leaker And US Attorney Team Who Covered It Up (October 30, 2020)

Complaint, Walters v. Bharara, Case 20cv8803 (SDNY Oct 22, 2020)

… AND SOME DAYS THE BEAR GETS YOU

Inmates cannot make a phone call without reading the writing on the wall (literally, it is painted on the wall above the phones in big letters, both English and Spanish) warning that phone calls are monitored and recorded.

Martin Shkreli, the original pharma bro (now a resident of FCI Allenwood Low), discovered that getting locked up wasn’t the end of his legal problems. The Federal Trade Commission sued a company he had run for anticompetitive conduct, and – with the cooperation of the BOP – got recordings of all of his inmate phone calls and emails.

martybear201119King Belshazzar was quite troubled by the handwriting on the wall, but Martin Shkreli is no King Belshazzar. so he talked freely on the inmate phones.  When the FTC told him it had gotten recordings of all of his inmate calls and emails – including communications with attorneys – from the BOP, Marty cried foul, arguing that he had an attorney-client privilege against disclosure, not to mention that the FTC’s possession of the records violated the Privacy Act.

The district court was unmoved. It ruled that under United States v. Mejia – 2nd Circuit precedent that holds an inmate has no expectation of privacy where all of the posted notices tell him otherwise – the court gave the FTC the go-ahead to use the material, except for a battle over four categories of documents. Last week, having rejected the Privacy Act argument, the court ruled that the FTC could use it all.

That should be a cautionary tale for inmates who don’t already believe those postings about calls and emails being monitored.

The bear got Marty…

Order, FTC v. Vyera Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Case 1:20cv706-DLC Dkt 308 (SDNY, November 10, 2020)

– Thomas L. Root