Monday, February 21, 2022

BOP CARES Act Extended Indefinitely; BOP Frustrates Prisoners and Families Demanding Prompt Application of FSA Sentence Credits

 

Biden Extends "National Emergency, Renewing CARES Indefinitely; DOJ Stalls on Sentence Credits; Relief Legislation Still Awaiting a Vote; Appellate Updates 

by Derek Gilna 

            President Joe Biden said the U.S. national emergency that was declared in early 2020 due to COVID-19 will be extended beyond March 1, citing what he called a “risk to the public health and safety.” Since the CARES program depends upon there being a continuing health emergency, this is good news for federal prisoners, and removes a source of anxiety for many approaching their 50% dates.

            However, the battle continues to force DOJ to fully implement the First Step Act (FSA) mandated sentence credits and also to revise PATTERN classifications. The law is clear on this subject: FSA sentence credits were due to be posted on January 15, 2022, and there is no further wiggle room  for DOJ on this hard deadline.   Nor can RDAP graduates be denied their separate one-year sentence credit I would be happy to assist you in receiving your proper sentence credits. The extension of the state of emergency also breathes new life into compassionate release filings, as infection totals in the federal prison system continue to grow,  and the effects of Long-Covid and  adverse vaccine reactions strain the ability of already-inadequate prison medical treatment.

            One email received from you this week discussed the inequity of increasing sentences by "acquitted conduct," certainly one of the most sinister aspects of federal criminal sentencing. The enhancement of sentences after you plead guilty also falls into this broad area of injustice. Although the pending "Equal Act" has gotten most of the publicity, this bill, with five bipartisan power-house Senators behind it, could have a real impact on sentencing and dramatically curb prosecutorial sentencing abuse. If made retroactive (a provision not in the current draft) , it would require resentencing of tens of thousands of prisoners. In any event, it would prevent any court from considering a defendant's acquitted behavior or charge at a sentencing, unless it is to lessen his sentence.

            Now what of those of you who have a Medium Pattern classification, which permits the accrual of FSA sentence credits, but not their application to your sentence?

I am strongly advocating for Mediums to receive this credit, and there is intense Congressional scrutiny on the arguably racist methodology used in initial classifications. It is clear that this is also an appropriate subject for litigation, which can only spur positive change.  The clear and stated purpose of FSA was to give prisoners incentives to improve themselves, regardless of past offenses. I welcome your inquiries.

            Another subject for Congressional inquiry is the scandalous state of federal prison medical care, which is a national disgrace. I have been inundated by comments from prisoners who have serious, chronic diseases, including cancer, that have not only not been properly diagnosed, but even after diagnosis, have not properly treated (See the case of the late Michelle McGee).   Some prisons are six months behind in transporting prisoners for outside medical evaluation or treatment.

            And which prisons are the worst?   Ironically, it the so-called "medical centers" which are the worst offenders. The COVID crisis exposed their inadequacies and lack of staff to Congress and the entire country, and the situation is only growing worse, as "Mix and Match" continues as clearly purposeful action. Lack of adequate medical treatment, decaying facilities, inadequate food, minimal commissary, and short-staffed  facilities make a mockery of Congressional intent.  Although "hard-time credit" filings are only the stuff of rumor, there are still plenty of avenues of relief available under FSA.

            As promised,  I include some recent favorable compassionate release decisions. See: United States v. Edwards, 2020 WL 7263880, at *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 10, 2020); prisoner at FCI Beaumont Low, now in community confinement at RRM, sentenced to 48 months for drugs (marijuana), release date February 2021, who had Hypertension and seizure condition. Also, United States v. Cano, 2020 WL 7415833, at *4 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 16, 2020). Among the several reasons advanced by Defendant, the Court focused on two she declined to entertain when deciding Defendant’s pro se  petition. Defendant explains (1) there are two serious issues with his Judgment and (2) none of his Co-Defendants received the sentence he received — a life sentence.   He was granted reconsideration based on manifest injustice, can now recognize extraordinary and compelling reasons based on discretion.

            Additionally, see Brown v. United States, 2020 WL 7425328, at *1 (D. Md. Dec. 17, 2020), where petitioner was 71 years of age, had been incarcerated since May 2000, and was serving a sentence of life plus 30 years for drug trafficking and related offenses, imposed in August 2001. ECF 175.At the time, that sentence was mandatory for violent  and drug crimes. Also, see United States v. Marty, 2020 WL 7425338, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2020), where prisoner got 120 months for tax fraud. Petitioner had obesity, asthma, in her 60s, former smoker, was housed at FCI Dublin (which reportedly has 200 current cases), and had a  release date of December 2025 (served 35%). There are of course more.

            Nothing sums up DOJ COVID incompetence more than this recent prisoner account: "Testing is sporadic and random and recovery comes without even having a re-test. If an inmate test positive for the virus, they are moved out of the unit for 10 days, then they are placed back in to that same unit with inmates that are still negative. After the January 2022 breakout they tested a unit on the 5th of January where approximately 30 ... tested positive (via rapid test) they then tested again on the 19th where about 77... tested positive (lab test;: the last and finale test was done on the 7th of February, with no positive cases (rapid test)- peculiar given that when a test is sent to the lab that there is a spike in cases compared to the rapid test, that reports little to no cases." This pattern of ineptitude has been replicated in dozens of federal prisons in the past three months.

            Sheridan, the only federal prison in Oregon, is a special case.   There authorities have responded to the crisis not by attempting to solve the problem, but by censoring prisoner email contacts (full disclosure: including mine). From local media, comes this frightening account: "Inmates describe the Sheridan prison complex in crisis, unable to meet not just health care, but other basic needs, like clean laundry and sanitary food prep.(and)...have not improved over the course of the pandemic and numerous medical requests from inmates inside the facility continue to go unaddressed...Cancer patients have not received treatment for months. Inmates who say they’ve attempted suicide have not received the medication or mental health treatment they’ve requested. In December, a man died in his cell, according to (a) Feb. 4 court filing (death number 4),... the fourth person in the last year who died (there)....Lisa Hay, Oregon’s federal public defender, described the problems inside the Bureau of Prisons run facility as below the standards required by the U.S. Constitution. 'What’s most dismaying to me is that we’re hearing the same kinds of complaints for two years and ...“People are dying, people are being harmed, people are being harmed psychologically and physically.'”

            As the dust settles over mask and vaccine mandates in the outside world, new scrutiny is being paid to those individuals who had serious reactions to the vaccine, as noted in various research websites. Of over 7 million reactions noted, 75% noted "Nervous System Disorders,"  Skin tissue disorders, " %, 40%, Respiratory disorders, 14%, Psychiatric disorders, and 7%, "Eye disorders." https://www.theepochtimes.com/worst-experience-of-my-life-early-vaccine-adopters-suffer-injuries-struggle-to-get-proper-care_4277958.html?utm_source=Health&utm_campaign=health-2022-02-20.

            In the Circuits: Ruvalcaba v US, 21-1064, (1st Cir. 2-16-22) where the First Circuit held that a district court, when adjudicating a prisoner-initiated motion for compassionate release, is not bound by the Sentencing Commission's current policy statement and may consider the First Step Act's (FSA) non-retroactive changes in sentencing law on an individualized basis to determine whether an extraordinary and compelling reason exists for compassionate release. While Defendant was serving his sentence Congress passed the FSA. See Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194. The FSA reduced certain enhanced mandatory minimum penalties and modified the criteria for qualifying prior offenses and also amended the compassionate release statute, 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A), to allow prisoners to file their own motions for compassionate release. Defendant subsequently moved for compassionate release. The district court denied the motion, concluding that the FSA's changes could not support an extraordinary and compelling reason for compassionate release. The First Circuit vacated the judgment below, holding that the court erred by concluding, as a matter of law, that the FSA's prospective changes to the mandatory minimum penalties could not, even when considered on an individualized basis, support a decision for compassionate release.

            In US v. Bates, 19-10813 ( 5th Cir. February 7, 2022), Per Curiam, Bates was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and received a 71-month sentence. On appeal, he argued that the district court improperly applied an enhancement under the Sentencing Guidelines for defendants with prior felony convictions for “crime[s] of violence.” U.S.S.G. 2K2.1(a)(4)(A). Bates’ prior conviction was for Texas’s version of assault of a public servant, which has a minimum mental state requirement of recklessness. In 2020, the Fifth Circuit rejected his argument. The Supreme Court then issued its 2021 “Borden” decision that crimes that can be committed recklessly cannot qualify as a “violent felony” under the “elements clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act. The Fifth Circuit subsequently held that Borden governs what can qualify as a crime of violence under the Sentencing Guidelines. The Fifth Circuit then vacated Bates’ conviction and remanded to the district court. Under Borden, because Texas assault of a public servant can be committed recklessly, Bates has not committed a crime of violence as defined by the Sentencing Guidelines’ elements clause.

Be not afraid, and let not your heart be troubled.

Derek Gilna, Director, JD, (De Paul Law School , 1975), MARJ, (Vermont Law School, 2020), Federal Legal Center, 113 McHenry Rd. #173, Buffalo Grove, IL   60089 (and Indiana); dgilna1948@yahoo.com (English newsletter and ALL inquiries, English or Spanish); (Alternate email: dagilna1948@yahoo.com, OR firststeprelief@yahoo.com).federallc_esp@yahoo.com, Spanish newsletter, but NO inquiries.Blog:  "Derek Gilna's Federal Criminal Justice Musings and Reflections."