Tag Archives: new york

BOP Fiddles While Prisons Crumble – Update for May 12, 2023

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

DOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL SAYS BOP FACILITIES ARE FALLING APART… AND NO ONE KNOWS WHAT TO DO

In a couple of reports issued last week that will surprise few, the Department of Justice Inspector General said the BOP is falling down, and management knows it but pretends otherwise.

nero230512In the first report, the IG said, “The BOP’s institutions are aging and deteriorating: all 123 of the BOP’s institutions require maintenance, with a large and growing list of unfunded modernization and repair needs, and three of these institutions are in such critical stages of disrepair that they are fully or partially closed.

The report found that the BOP chronically requests much less maintenance money from Congress than it needs. At the same time, Congress has set aside over $1 billion to build two new institutions, “but these funds remain largely unspent, the projects have been in the planning stages for over a decade, and the BOP’s requests each year that Congress cancel one of these projects and rescind the funds—made at the direction of the Department of Justice and the Office of Management and Budget—have not been acted on.”

The second report is more damning. Because of operational deficiencies at USP Atlanta and MCC New York (since closed), the IG set out to “assess how critical issues at BOP institutions are identified, communicated to BOP Executive Staff, and remediated.”

But the BOP Executive Staff told the IG “they had been largely aware of the long-standing operational issues at USP Atlanta and MCC New York and expressed confidence in the BOP’s existing mechanisms to communicate information about operational issues.” In light of the fact the staff knew all about the messes in New York and Atlanta but had done nothing about them, the IG “modified the scope of this review… to focus on [the] causes and the scope of the challenges, their effects on institutional operations, and the Executive Staff’s efforts to remedy them.”

dogandpony230512The IG found that BOP internal audits of facilities were not reliable because everyone knew when the audits were to happen and, predictably enough, put on a ‘dog-and-pony’ show for the inspectors. “Executive Staff members questioned whether the BOP’s overwhelmingly positive enterprise-wide audit ratings reflected actual institution conditions,” the report said. “Validating this concern, we found that the USP Atlanta internal audit conducted in January 2020 rated USP Atlanta’s inmate management efforts as Acceptable despite identifying numerous significant issues.”

Also, the report said, the BOP’s internal investigative staff has insufficient, resulting in a “substantial backlog of unresolved employee misconduct cases.” Not only does the BOP lack adequate staff the IG found, it doesn’t even know “whether the number of staff it represents as necessary to manage its institutions safely and effectively is accurate.”

Finally, the BOP’s “inability to address its aging infrastructure as a foundational, enterprise-wide challenge [limits] its ability to remedy institution operational issues.” In other words, the agency does not have a coherent maintenance plan, but rather just tries to fix problems when they get too serious, resulting in “increasing maintenance costs and, in the most extreme circumstances, having to shutter institutions and relocate inmates because needed maintenance and repairs have resulted in unsafe conditions.”

"Do you miss me yet?" No...
“Do you miss me yet?” No…

In a written response to a draft of this report, the unlamented former BOP Director Michael Carvajal said the challenges discussed in this report were “long-established” prior to his February 2020 appointment. He added that the executive staff “acknowledged and made attempts to address these issues in some fashion, although they may not have been corrected or completed for various reasons.” Conveniently omitting the fact that in his 30-year tenure with the BOP, he had been everything from a correctional officer to a lieutenant, a captain, a correctional services administrator, an associate warden, a warden, a regional director and Assistant Director in Washington, D.C., Carvajal whined that his appointment and two-year tenure coincided with the onset of COVID-19 and that “responding to the pandemic ‘required prioritization of resources behind life safety’.”

DOJ, The Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Efforts to Maintain and Construct Institutions, Rpt No 23-064 (May 3, 2023)

DOJ, Limited-Scope Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Strategies to Identify, Communicate, and Remedy Operational Issues, Rpt No 23-065 (May 4, 2023)

BOP, BOP Director Announces Plans to Retire (January 5, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Some of It’s Violent, Some of It’s Not – Update for February 5, 2019

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

MIXED WEEK FOR CRIMES OF VIOLENCE

Defendants arguing that prior state convictions were not crimes of violence enjoyed mixed results last week.

violent160620A 10th Circuit panel ruled in United States v. Bong that robbery under Kansas law can be accomplished with minimal force that falls short of the “violent force” required under the Armed Career Criminal Act’s elements clause. What’s more, Kansas aggravated robbery – a robbery committed by someone armed with a dangerous weapon or who inflicts bodily harm during course of a robbery – is not violent, either. Merely being “armed” with a weapon during the course of a robbery, the court said, is not sufficient to render the state offense a “violent crime” for ACCA purposes.

Things did not go so well in the 2nd Circuit. There, the court held in United States v. Thrower that 3rd degree robbery under N.Y. Penal Law 160.05 is a crime of violence for ACCA purposes. The crime requires “forcible stealing,” which is defined as common to every degree of robbery in New York State, requires use or threat of the immediate use of physical force sufficient to prevent or overcome victim resistance. “By its plain language,” the Circuit said, “the New York robbery statute matches the Armed Career Criminal Act.” The holding includes not just 3rd degree robbery, but by necessity all levels of New York robbery.

A 9th Circuit panel, however, held in United States v. Vederoff that 2nd degree assault under Wash. Rev. Code 9A.36.021(1) is overbroad when compared to the generic definition of aggravated assault, because the statute encompasses assault with intent to commit a felony. Because Washington’s 2nd-degree assault statute is indivisible, the panel could not apply the modified categorical approach, and therefore concluded that Washington second-degree assault does not qualify as a “crime of violence” under the enumerated clause of USSG 4B1.2. For the same reason, the panel held, 2nd-degree murder under Washington Code 9A.32.050 is overbroad because the statute covers felony murder. The panel found the statute indivisible, and therefore concluded 2nd-degree murder is not a “crime of violence” under the enumerated clause of USSG 4B1.2.

The 8th Circuit ruled in Mora-Higuera v, United States that a defendant’s 2255 motion, asserting a due process right to be sentenced without reference to the residual clause of USSG 4B1.2(a)(2) under the mandatory guidelines, was not dictated by Johnson v. United States, because it is “reasonably debatable whether Johnson’s holding regarding the ACCA extends to the former mandatory guidelines.” Thus, the defendant was not able to challenge his mandatory Guidelines career offender sentence on the grounds one of the prior crimes of violence was invalidated by Johnson.

vaguenes160516Finally, the 10th Circuit agreed in United States v. Pullen that “the Supreme Court has never recognized a void for vagueness challenge to the Guidelines and so Johnson neither creates a new rule applicable to the Guidelines nor dictates that any provision of the Guidelines is subject to a void for vagueness challenge.”

United States v. Bong, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798 (10th Cir. Jan. 28, 2019)

United States v. Thrower, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3145 (2nd Cir. Jan. 31, 2019)

United States v. Vederoff, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3314 (9th Cir., Feb. 1, 2019)

Mora-Higuera v. United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3139 (8th Cir. Jan 31, 2019)

United States v. Pullen, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 2937 (10th Cir. Jan. 29, 2019)

– Thomas L. Root