DOJ Operations Reel Under Onslaught of Covid-19,
Congressional, Advocate, and Public Pressure
by Derek Gilna
Your voices
have been heard. As the outside world does its best to stay safe, DOJ, and the
publicity-adverse federal prison system,
has been inundated by hundreds of thousands of letters, emails,
articles, and Congressional probing and emergency legislation to take action in
this crisis. In an unprecedented move, AG Barr issued a directive to his
embattled staff of 113,000 to consider
home confinement to reduce prisoner counts. As of now, there are no known
updates to this directive.
The new
Corona virus relief bill signed by the President this past week permits Barr to
authorize expanded use of home confinement, if he finds that "emergency
conditions will materially affect the functioning of the Bureau." However,
if past experience is any indicator of future performance, your letters to
wardens seeking compassionate release based upon "extraordinary and
compelling" circumstances (which are uniformly denied) will have to be
promptly followed up by a filing with your sentencing court. Although there as
yet few reported cases, some courts have already granted relief, but only in
the case where requests for release are documented and well pleaded, in FSA Compassionate
Release petitions.
Ironically,
Senate Resolution 549 calls for April to be designated "Second Chance
Month," uncomfortably highlighting for all to see the results of decades
of DOJ mismanagement, especially of its
prison health-care procedures. DOJ employee unions are also putting serious pressure
on upper management to respond to the crisis, making it even more probable that
if DOJ does not take decisive action, the courts can and will. However, the courts can only rule on
petitions put before them.
In the
circuits, there is some good news to report. The prisoner-unfriendly 11th
Circuit has ruled that Hobbs Act robbery does not qualify as a "crime of
violence" under the Sentencing Guidelines, USSG Section 4B1.2(a), vacated
multiple convictions for resentencing. U.S.
v Eason, 16-15413 (11th Cir. 3-24-20 ).
In U.S.
v Gary , the court ruled that
"we hold that (his) guilty plea was not knowingly and intelligently made
because he did not understand the essential elements of the offense to which he
pled guilty. Because the court accepted (his) plea without giving him notice of
an element of the offense the ...error is structural...(and)we vacate his
guilty plea and convictions and remand..."
The 7th
also vacated a guilty plea of two men, holding that their prior state
convictions were not prior drug convictions, where certain Indiana convictions
were not countable as predicate drug offenses because the Indiana statute
reached at least two other substances not includable under federal law. U.S.
v. De La Torre, 18-2009, (10-19-19 ).
Thanks to my fellow Prison Legal News and Criminal Legal News writer Dale
Chappell, who has written extensively on this subject and is the author of a
book on this very subject. Stay
safe, and Let Not Your Heart be Troubled.
Federal Legal Center, Inc, Derek A. Gilna, J.D., Director
(Also in Indiana )
dgilna1948@yahoo.com