SCOTUS Issues Temporary Stay of Elkton Prisoner Release,
Awaiting 6th Circuit Ruling
by Derek Gilna
Last week
the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued a temporary stay,
authored by Justice Sotomayor, which put on hold federal district court rulings
compelling the federal government to transfer 800 vulnerable prisoners from
Elkton to either home confinement, or other institutions. The focus now shifts
to the pending 6th Circuit ruling on government appeals of the same issues
orally argued last week.
In the
districts, judges have been dealing with a deluge of Compassionate Release (CR)
petitions, motivating federal prison officials to transfer qualified
individuals, including several in which we were involved, to either home
confinement or outright release. The COVID-19 releases show no sign of slowing
down. as the disease continues its spread in federal prisons. At the Butner
complex, out of 4000 prisoners, over 500 have contracted the illness. Judges,
however , have largely strictly enforced the requirement of waiting 30 days
after filing for CR at the prison level before considering CR court filings.
Institutional
lockdowns continue, with a few exceptions,
to restrict the flow of communications between prisoners and their
family and outside contacts, which has resulted in a lot of
"snail-mail," which we will do our best to answer in a timely
fashion.
As inner
cities calm, SCOTUS considers whether to roll-back the doctrine of
"qualified immunity," which has largely shielded law enforcement from
accountability for questionable police tactics. We would expect this doctrine
to be severely limited when the court considers the three related cases before
it. Can the end of prosecutorial immunity be far behind? The public no longer supports policy that
accepts police as above the law. Both
political parties can be expected to reflect this in party platforms.
In the
circuits, the 7th Circuit issued a Rehaif decision in US v. Maez, 19-1287 (consol.), 6-1-20, wherein it ruled
that "Rehaif's discussion of 'the well-known maxim that 'ignorance of the
law...;is no excuse' makes doubly clear that 922g requires knowledge only of
status, not knowledge of the 922g prohibition itself," rejecting the
"willfulness" defense. It let
stand, the "narrower requirement of
knowledge of status."
In the 6th,
in US 6-1-20 . the court
on FSA grounds affirmed that "defendant is entitled to an accurate amended
guideline calculation and renewed consideration of 18 USC
3553(a) factors, and a defendant seeking to raise objections must be afforded
an opportunity to do so." Finally,
the 8th Circuit in US v. Banks, the
court affirmed a FSA sentence reduction from 55 years to 40 years, in a 21 USC
846(b)(a)(A) conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base over
government objections.
We
encourage all of your with recent convictions or unsuccessful direct appeals to
consider filing a 2255 habeas petition, alleging inadequate
representation of counsel, in an attempt to win a lower sentence, as did one of
our clients who was recently sent home.
May your efforts to win justice never cease, and let not
your heart be troubled.
Federal Legal Center, Inc., Derek A. Gilna, JD, Director,
