Tag Archives: home confinement

BOP Records First COVID-19 Death As Congress OKs Expanded Home Confinement – Update for March 30, 2020

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

BARR AND THE CARES ACT

death200330A week ago, America had 35,000 COVID-19 cases with 40 deaths. As of this morning, the nation has over 143,000 cases and 2,052 deaths. The Federal Bureau of Prisons’ very questionable numbers, as of yesterday, showed 14 inmates and 13 staff down with the virus. The actual inmate number is undoubtedly much higher than what the BOP is willing to admit.

On Saturday night, a low-security inmate at FCI Oakdale I, 49-year old Patrick Jones, became the BOP’s first COVID-19 death. Jones, 49, was transferred to a hospital on March 19, days before the BOP admitted to having any inmates who had tested positive for COVID-19. He was placed on a ventilator the next day. Jones, who suffered from “long-term, pre-existing medical conditions” considered risk factors for severe coronavirus illness, died Saturday at the hospital, a BOP news release said.

Last Thursday, Attorney General William Barr instructed the Bureau of Prisons to “prioritize the use of your statutory authorities to grant home confinement for inmates” in response to the virus.

That “statutory authority” got a lot broader the next day, when Congress passed The CARES Act, which President Trump signed the same day. Buried in its 373 pages is a single section devoted to the BOP.  Section 12003(b)(2) provides that

(2) HOME CONFINEMENT AUTHORITY.—During the covered emergency period, if the Attorney General finds that emergency conditions will materially affect the functioning of the Bureau, the Director of the Bureau may lengthen the maximum amount of time for which the Director is authorized to place a prisoner in home confinement under the first sentence of section 3624(c)(2) of title 18, United States Code, as the Director determines appropriate.

emergency200330The “covered emergency period” began when Trump declared a national emergency and ends 30 days after he declares that the emergency has ended.

Under 18 USC § 3624(c)(2), the BOP can send an inmate to home confinement for not more than 10% of his or her sentence, up to a maximum of 6 months. The CARES Act provision has lifted the 10%/6-month limitation. This means that the BOP can send anyone with anything short of a life sentence to home confinement right away.

Sec. 12003 provides no guidance whatsoever as to how the BOP should pick the people to go to home confinement, or even if it should send anyone at all. However, Sec. 12003(c)(2) exempts any BOP rules on how to do it from the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, which means the BOP can roll out its own rules immediately.

The CARES Act passage makes Barr’s Thursday memo much more important. While the only authority the BOP has to wield as of Thursday was the Elderly Offender Home Detention Program (34 USC § 60541(g)(5)), it can now move many more people. Barr’s memo specified what the BOP should consider in making its decisions:

• inmate’s age and vulnerability to COVID-19 under Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines;

• The inmate’s security level, with priority given to inmates residing in low and minimum security facilities;

• The inmate’s conduct in prison, with inmates who have engaged in violent or gang-related activity in prison or who have incurred a BOP violation within the last year not receiving priority treatment;

• The inmate’s PATTERN score, with inmates who have anything above a minimum score not receiving priority treatment;

• Whether the inmate has a “demonstrated and verifiable re-entry plan that will prevent recidivism and maximize public safety, including verification that the conditions under which the inmate would be confined upon release would present a lower risk of contracting COVID-19 than the inmate would face in his or her BOP facility;” and

• The inmate’s crime of conviction, and assessment of the danger posed by the inmate to the community.

The memo stated that “some offenses, such as sex offenses, will render an inmate ineligible for home detention. Other serious offenses should weigh more heavily against consideration for home detention.”

BOP proposes holding anyone it releases in quarantine for 14 days prior to release to home confinement.

corona200313How much of this will happen? The devil’s in the details. The U.S. Probation Office has to approved residences for people going to home confinement, and Probation monitors people once they go home (usually with ankle monitors). There is a real possibility for a bottleneck as the U.S. Probation Office runs short of people to approve residences and of ankle monitors with which to take home confinement detainees.

Yesterday, the Marshall Project complained that Barr’s memo blocks anyone convicted of a sex offense or violent crime from being released to home confinement. DOJ policy also bars all non-citizens convicted of immigration-related offenses from serving out their time at home. Neither “sex crime” nor “violent crime” is defined in the memo, leaving the interpretation to the BOP. Note that The CARES Act leaves implementation of expanded home confinement to the BOP’s discretion.

Of course, nothing in the Barr memo or The CARES Act limits anyone’s right – even people with sex offenses or violent crimes – to seek compassionate release under 18 USC § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

Washington Post, An explosion of coronavirus cases cripples a federal prison in Louisiana (Mar. 29, 2020)

William Barr, Prioritizarion of Home Confinement as Appropriate In Response to COVID-19 Pandemic (Mar. 26, 2020)

The CARES Act, H.R. 748 (signed into law Mar. 27, 2020)

The Marshall Project, How Bill Barr’s COVID-19 Prisoner Release Plan Could Favor White People (Mar 28, 2020)

– Thomas L. Root

BOP Directed to Send Some Boomers Home – Update for March 27, 2020

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

ATTORNEY GENERAL TELLS BOP TO SEND SOME PEOPLE HOME

Attorney General William Barr moved yesterday to release some federal inmates at heightened risk from the coronavirus, but he said no one would be freed immediately under the policy because of the need to make sure prisoners are not spreading the virus into the community.

corona200313Barr told the BOP in a memo to prioritize granting home confinement to inmates who were convicted of lower level crimes, have shown good conduct behind bars and have plans for release that won’t put them and others at greater risk for contracting the virus.

“We don’t want our institutions to become petri dishes,” Mr. Barr said at an unrelated news conference. “We have the protocols that are designed to stop that. One of those tools will be identifying vulnerable prisoners who would make more sense to allow to go home to finish their confinement.”

The attorney general said he asked BOP officials last week about protecting vulnerable inmates and lowering the chances of a serious outbreak by lowering prison populations.

“I asked if it was possible to expand home confinement, particularly for those older prisoners who have served substantial parts of their sentences and no longer pose a threat and may have underlying conditions that make them particularly vulnerable,” Barr said.

Barr told prison officials to give priority to inmates held in low and minimum security facilities; to those who haven’t been involved in violence or gang activities; and to those with low PATTERN scores. Those convicted of serious offenses, including sex crimes won’t be eligible, Barr said.

Barr’s guidance overlaps with a provision in the relief bill the U.S. House of Representatives is expected to pass TODAY, which lets the BOP shift federal inmates into home confinement sooner. Under 18 USC § 3624(c) as currently written, home confinement is capped at six months or 10% of a sentence, whichever is shorter. The bill removes that limit during the pandemic. The moves come as prisons are detecting more cases of the deadly virus.

release160523As of Thursday morning, Barr said six federal inmates and four staffers had tested positive for the virus, prompting the lockdown of several facilities, including ones in New York City, Atlanta and Louisiana. Barr said he’s getting reports of additional cases as well, but didn’t have the details.

As of yesterday’s 3 pm BOP update, the number had climbed to 10 inmates and eight staff, at MDC Brooklyn, MCC New York, USP Atlanta, FCI Oakdale and in halfway houses in Phoenix and Brooklyn. Staff have tested positive at Butner, NC; Ray Brook, NY; New York City; Danbury, CT; Yazoo City, MS; Leavenworth, KS; Atlanta, GA; and Grand Prairie, TX.

Criminal justice experts welcomed the idea of releasing more inmates to home confinement, but hoped the BOP would break its track record of granting release or home confinement in fewer cases than it could. Kyle O’Dowd, associate executive director of policy for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, told Law360 that while the law and the memo are steps in the right direction, it remains to be seen how the BOP will carry them out.

“My concern is that it won’t be implemented as robustly as it needs to be. There is a history of BOP being pretty conservative in their application of authorities they already have,” O’Dowd said.

Any prisoners moved out of federal facilities as part of the effort would be held in quarantine within the prison for 14 days before release to make sure they are not infectious, Barr’s memo said. Those convicted of sex offenses would not be considered for release, and those serving time for “serious offenses“ would have less chance of getting out, the directive said.

In some cases, vulnerable prisoners might be at less risk in jail than they would be at home, Barr argued. “Many inmates will be safer in BOP facilities where the population is controlled and there is ready access to doctors and medical care,“ he wrote.

Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman wrote in his Sentencing Law and Policy blog that

[e]ven assuming that only a very small percentage of prisoners, say, only 1 out of every 15 current federal prisoners, meet the home confinement criteria, that would still mean that well over 11,000 federal prisoners would be eligible to head home to serve out the rest of their sentences. Because BOP has a well-earn reputation for being unwilling or unable to help prisoners get out of federal facilities early, I am not so confident that we will soon be seeing thousands of federal prisoners heading home. But the directive from AG Barr now would seem to make that more of a possibility.

Politico, Feds may send some prisoners home due to virus risk (Mar. 26, 2020)

Wall Street Journal, Barr Tells Federal Prisons to Increase Use of Home Confinement, Fearing Spread of Coronavirus (Mar. 26, 2020)

Law360.com, Federal Prisons Can Send More Inmates Home. Will They? (Mar. 26)

Sentencing Law and Policy, Will thousands of federal prisoners be eligible for home confinement under AG Barr’s new guidelines? (Mar. 26)

– Thomas L. Root

Scam-a-lot: An Oak Falls In The Forest, And Makes A Noise – Update for February 5, 2020

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

THE MIGHTY OAK HAS FALLEN

oaks200206Hey, all you inmates who signed up in a fevered rush for the Oaks of Justice home release program last year? The one with the fancy satellite monitor? How’s that working out for you?

Remember Oaks of Justice, the outfit run by the woman with many names, who was all the buzz on federal prison compounds last year? A year ago, Oaks was mere days away from springing the first of 1,200 inmates from institutions to home confinement and lawful employment. The nonprofit was noodling with White House officials and Bureau of Prisons bigwigs on kick-starting the program, and inmates were lined up like the commissary when a new Honeybun shipment arrives.

honeybun200206Oaks of Justice had a great shtick: after I talked to Oaks “founder” Joanne Morgan, she had me convinced that the sun rose in the west and set in the east. Her “experts” were fine-tuning the satellite tracking system, which worked in some mysterious way Joanne could not quite explain, and bureaucratic roadblocks were being swept away by White House confederates of Jared Kushner. Sure I thought her website had been put together by 5th graders on a budget, but she said Oaks wanted to spend its money on developing the program, not bells and whistles. And sure I could not quite figure out how the smart watch trackers could communicate with satellites, but Joanne explained Oaks had a scientist who had put it all together. And sure I could not find any statutory authority for what Oaks was planning to do, but Joanne assured me that that was because I had insufficient imagination.

Well, the mighty Oak has fallen… and crushed inmate hopes like a tree trunk hitting a cheap car. Inmates about to depart prison last April are still sitting on the bunks, possessions stuffed into mesh laundry bags awaiting that call to the front gate. And last week, The Marshall Project, a nonprofit focused on criminal justice, ran a lengthy piece by investigative reporter Christine Thompson putting a chainsaw to the mighty Oaks.

It sounded like a good deal for everyone involved,” Thompson wrote. “Participants would return to their families while the federal government would save “billions” on incarceration. Morgan has claimed in emails and phone calls with potential customers that officials with the Federal Bureau of Prisons and President Donald Trump himself support the program.

But attorneys familiar with the federal prison system and a former bureau official said, based on their years of knowledge and experience, that a program of this kind would never happen. A spokesperson for the Bureau of Prisons confirmed in an email to The Marshall Project that the agency has no such deal with the company. And a reverse Google image search shows the photos of the company’s “proprietary” new tracking devices appear to be consumer GPS devices from the Chinese e-commerce site Ali Express, marketed to help monitor confused elderly people or teenage children.

satellitetrack200203Thompson noted that “Morgan — whose real name, according to court records, is Winnie Joanne Barefoot — insisted that the company was legitimate and was nearing approval from the Justice Department but that she could not provide proof.” As the LISA Newsletter of March 11, 2019, reported, “‘We have gotten the go-ahead from the White House’ for the program, Morgan said last Friday, ‘and we are waiting for acceptance of our protocols by BOP.’ Morgan expects BOP approval this week, and the first group of 600 prisoners to enter the program in March. She said two additional groups of 1,000 participants each should enter the program by the end of May.”

By the way, Ms. Barefoot was released from federal prison in 2016 after a stint for banks fraud, but if anyone believes in second chances, I do, and I hardly judge her for that. As for the ever-changing names, I like to call myself “The Potentate of Post-Conviction,” but I don’t introduce myself that way. Like everything else about Oaks, Ms. Winnie Joanne Morgan Barefoot’s bell rang slightly off key.

So what was the scam?  That is what still puzzles people. Each applicant was to pay a $250.00 application fee, but Oaks reportedly told people to wait until the company had BOP and White House approvals. Once the program started, inmates and their families would have to cough up thousands of dollars to participate in the program, but that was disclosed ahead of time, and those sums would be paid when the inmate entered the program. So while Oaks is phony, no one is quite sure what the point of the swindle was, or even for sure that it was a swindle.

oak200206Nevertheless, Oaks crushed a lot of inmate hopes. Thompson told the story of female inmate with the last name Wallace, who had signed up with Oaks and was waiting… and waiting. “‘Prison is like a trial run of death,’ Wallace’s sister told Thompson. ‘You’re still breathing, you’re still getting up, but you have zero decisions about yourself. You have nothing… To have someone promising and promising and never come through—what can I believe?'”

The Marshall Project, Trade Your Prison Sentence for a Smartwatch? – Another dubious get-out-early offer is spreading through federal prisons. Lawyers say it’s a fake (Jan 28)

LISA Newsletter, Oaks of Justice – Forget We Ever Said That (March 11, 2019)

– Thomas L. Root