28 C.F.R. § 2.35

Mandatory release in the absence of parole

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A prisoner shall be mandatorily released by operation of law at the end of the sentence imposed by the court less such good time deductions as he may have earned through his behavior and efforts at the institution of confinement. If released pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4164, such prisoner shall be released, as if on parole, under supervision until the expiration of the maximum term or terms for which he was sentenced less 180 days. If released pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4205(f), such prisoner shall remain under supervision until the expiration of the maximum term or terms for which he was sentenced. Insofar as possible, release plans shall be completed before the release of any such prisoner.

(b) It is the Commission's interpretation of the statutory scheme for parole and good time that the only function of good time credits is to determine the point in a prisoner's sentence when, in the absence of parole, the prisoner is to be conditionally released on supervision, as described in subsection (a). Once an offender is conditionally released from imprisonment, either by parole or mandatory release, the good time earned during that period of imprisonment is of no further effect either to shorten the period of supervision or to shorten the period of imprisonment which the offender may be required to serve for violation of parole or mandatory release.

(c) A prisoner committed under the Youth Corrections Act must be initially released conditionally under supervision not later than two years before the expiration of the term imposed by the court.

(d) If the Commission orders a military prisoner who is under the Commission's jurisdiction for an offense committed after August 15, 2001 continued to the expiration of his sentence (or otherwise does not grant parole), the Commission shall place such prisoner on mandatory supervision after release if the Commission determines that such supervision is appropriate to provide an orderly transition to civilian life for the prisoner and to protect the community into which such prisoner is released. The Commission shall presume that mandatory supervision is appropriate for all such prisoners unless case-specific factors indicate that supervision is inappropriate. A prisoner who is placed on mandatory supervision shall be deemed to be released as if on parole, and shall be subject to the conditions of release at § 2.40 until the expiration of the maximum term for which he was sentenced, unless the prisoner's sentence is terminated early by the appropriate military clemency board.

[42 FR 39809, Aug. 5, 1977, as amended at 50 FR 46283, Nov. 7, 1985; 67 FR 67792, Nov. 7, 2002; 68 FR 16720, Apr. 7, 2003]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 57 cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: Lamar Coleman v. United States Parole Commissio, 644 F. App'x 159 (3rd Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lamar Coleman v. United States Parole Commissio, 644 F. App'x 159 (3rd Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “The District Court further concluded that Coleman’s § 2241 petition was merit-less regardless of the exhaustion issue.”

Renee Decuir v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 800 F.2d 1021 (10th Cir. 1986). · cites it 4× “At the time when the Parole Commission issued its supplemental parole violator warrant, petitioner was on “mandatory release” status, having been released from federal custody at the expiration of his term of sentence less time deducted for good conduct.”

Patterson v. Knowles, 162 F.3d 574 (10th Cir. 1998). · cites it 2× “Parole commission regulation 28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (b) provides that good time credit earned prior to a conditional release has no effect after a revocation of parole.”

United States of Am. Ex Rel. Herbert Sperling, Relator-Appellant v. Walter v. Fitzpatrick, Warden, West Street House of Det., 426 F.2d 1161 (2d Cir. 1970). · cites it 2× “5 In determining whether a mandatory releasee has violated any of the conditions under which he was released, the Board may consider information from any reliable source and if 'satisfactory evidence is presented to the Board, a warrant may be issued and the offender returned to…”

Scott v. Schuylkill FCI, 298 F. App'x 202 (3rd Cir. 2008). “See 28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (b); see also 28 C.F.R. § 523.”

Scott v. Holt, 297 F. App'x 154 (3rd Cir. 2008). “” 28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (b); see also 28 C.F.R. § 523.”

Donald Wayne Green v. Robert Christiansen, Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst., Lompoc, California, 732 F.2d 1397 (9th Cir. 1984). “” 28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (a) (1983). Because Green was not under federal parole supervision at any time, the Parole Commission had no authority to grant credit for time Green spent in the community.”

James Eugene Booth v. United States, 996 F.2d 1171 (11th Cir. 1993). · cites it 3× “28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (b) addresses the issue of whether good time credits may be applied to shorten a prisoner’s period of incarceration following a parole violation.”

Arciniega v. Freeman, 404 U.S. 4 (1971). “28 CFR § 2.35 . We do not believe that the parole condition restricting association was intended to apply to incidental contacts between ex-convicts in the course of work on a legitimate job for a common employer.”

Minor Michael Still v. United States Marshal, United States Parole Comm'n & Denver Sheriff's Dep't, 780 F.2d 848 (10th Cir. 1985). “Ironically, in Maslauskas , the court had relied on the phrase “a warrant” in 28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (1972) in concluding that the regulation contemplated “execution [of] only one warrant for any given parole violation or violations.”

Michael J. Bailey v. Donald J. Southerland, Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst., La Tuna, 821 F.2d 277 (5th Cir. 1987). “Moreover, Bailey’s contention about good time appears to be moot because under 28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (b), the good time of one confinement does not carry over to a second confinement.”

Paul E. Maslauskas, in No. 79-1845 v. U. S. Bd. of Parole, Paul E. Maslauskas, in No. 79-2139 v. Charles E. Fenton, Warden, 639 F.2d 935 (3rd Cir. 1980). “28 C.F.R. § 2.35 (1972) (emphasis added).”

Show all 57 citing cases →

— 28 C.F.R. § 2.35(b) — 3 cases

Young v. Nickels, 59 F. Supp. 2d 1137 (D. Kan. 1999).

Wallace v. Williams (S.D. Ill. 2022).

Lyles v. Woods (INMATE 2) (M.D. Ala. 2021).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.