Id.Through the 1994 Crime Bill, Congress also created an incentive for RDAP participation: Those nonviolent offenders who successfully complete the program while incarcerated (and who have not previously received early release via RDAP) are eligible for release up to one year before the expiration of sentence. 18 U.S.C. §3621(e). Importantly, prisoners ineligible for a reduction in sentence under §3621(e) are not precluded from participating in RDAP; the two are not mutually exclusive.Congress’s action had its desired result, especially since RDAP is the only BOP program through which federal prisoners can earn a sentence reduction.Admission to RDAPRDAP participation is voluntary. Interested prisoners within 36 months of release may apply by requesting an eligibility interview via a “cop-out” (informal request from a staff member) or a BP-8 (formal request for resolution).

Wedelstedt v. Wiley, --- F.3d ----, 2007 WL 512517 (10th Cir. Feb. 20, 2007)The 10th Cir., per Murphy, finds that BOP regulations prohibiting transfer of a federal inmate to a Community Correctional Center (“CCC”) until ten percent of his sentence remains are inconsistent with clear congressional intent articulated in 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) (the statute that authorizes the BOP to designate the place of confinement). The 10th follows the 2d, 3d, and 8th Circuits, the only ones to have thus far ruled on the issue, invalidating the BOP regs.The BOP designated P to a CCC for the last 33 days of his sentence (10% after calculating his GT credits).

Congress expressly provided for BOP’s use of residential treatment centers as places of imprisonment in 18 U.S.C. §§4082(a), (c) and reaffirmed the agency’s designation responsibilities in promulgating the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (SRA). Through 18 U.S.C. §3621(b), Congress authorized BOP to “designate the place of the prisoner’s imprisonment” at “any available penal or correctional facility that meets minimum standards of health and habitability.” In 1985, BOP’s general counsel issued a legal opinion interpreting the phrase “penal or correctional facility” in section 3621(b) as coincident with “institution or facility” in the former 18 U.S.C. §4082(a).In 1990, the statutory definition of “imprisonment” expanded to include home confinement when employed at the end of a prisoner’s sentence.

· Some sex offenders (primarily contact offenders) may be prohibited from using the BOP’s inmate electronic mail system (TRULINICS).· Although all are eligible for RDAP, contact offenders are not eligible for an 18 U.S.C. §3621(e) reduction for successful completion.Sex offenders are housed in standard general prison populations.

Accordingly, pursuant to the rulemaking authority vested in the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a), part 501 in subchapter A of 28 CFR, chapter V is amended as set forth below:SUBCHAPTER A--GENERAL MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIONPART 500--GENERAL DEFINITIONS1. The authority citation for 28 CFR part 500 continues to read as follows:Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses committed on or after November 1, 1987), 5006-5024 (Repealed October 12, 1984 as to offenses committed after that date), 5039; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510; 28 CFR 0.95-0.99.2. In Sec.

Rodriguez v. Copenhaver Rodriguez filed a 2241 habeas petition challenging the BOP’s denial of a discretionary nunc pro tunc designation of a state prison for service of his federal sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b). The Court held that the district court erred by dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction because it had jurisdiction to consider his “claims as the BOP violated the Constitution, exceeded its statutory authority, or acted contrary to established federal law.”

Many defense lawyers and defendants tend to downplay substance abuse problems under the mistaken belief that revealing such problems can harm the client. Unless a client’s substance abuse problem is adequately documented in the PSR, he or she may not qualify for the BOP’s Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP) and will not get the chance to earn up to a one-year reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3621(c)(2), which permits such a reduction for nonviolent inmates who successfully complete an RDAP in a BOP facility.5. It is important to ensure that the PSR lists the correct client address. Because “release residence” is defined by the BOP as the defendant’s legal address that’s listed on the PSR, the BOP will attempt to house your client near that address. If that address is not only far from family and friends who want to visit your client, but also far from the area to which your client intends to relocate upon release, you should consider requesting that another address be used.6. Do not “oversell” medical and mental health issues to the probation office.

It is important for defense counsel to make sure that the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) adequately documents any drug abuse or dependency (illegal or prescription) or alcohol problem. Unless a client’s substance abuse is adequately documented in the PSR, he or she may not qualify for the BOP’s Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP), and will not get the chance to earn up to a one-year reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3621(c)(2), which permits such a reduction for nonviolent inmates who successfully complete RDAP.To qualify for RDAP, one must have at least 24 months or more remaining to serve; a verifiable, documented pattern of substance abuse or dependence within the 12-month period preceding arrest on the underlying offense; have no serious mental or cognitive impairment precluding full program participation; be halfway house-eligible (which precludes participation by removable non-U.S. citizens); and sign acknowledgement of program responsibilities.The BOP places primary reliance on a prisoner’s self-reporting to the US Probation Office presentence report writer.

The 10th holds that, if the transcript indeed reflects the judge's FMC recommendation, Rule 36 provides the remedy to correct the judgment appropriately. Even though BOP doesn't have to follow the recommendation, it will then have the judge's considered judgment, which the BOP must consider under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b)(4)(B). U.S. v. Bong, 2014 WL 7210999 (12/18/14) (Kan.) (unpub'd) - If you thought, as I did, that Mr. Bong was convicted of a dope offense, you would be wrong.

Aside from the obvious, RDAP is important because it is one of the only programs that, if completed successfully, could result in a shorter prison sentence for our clients. See 18 U.S.C. 3621. So the program is in high demand.