28 C.F.R. § 2.44

Summons to appear or warrant for retaking of parolee

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

(a) If a parolee is alleged to have violated the conditions of his release, and satisfactory evidence thereof is presented, the Commission or a member thereof may:

(1) Issue a summons requiring the offender to appear for a preliminary interview or local revocation hearing.

(2) Issue a warrant for the apprehension and return of the offender to custody.

A summons or warrant may be issued or withdrawn only by the Commission, or a member thereof.

(b) Any summons or warrant under this section shall be issued as soon as practicable after the alleged violation is reported to the Commission, except when delay is deemed necessary. Issuance of a summons or warrant may be withheld until the frequency or seriousness of violations, in the opinion of the Commission, requires such issuance. In the case of any parolee charged with a criminal offense and awaiting disposition of the charge, issuance of a summons or warrant may be withheld, a warrant may be issued and held in abeyance, or a warrant may be issued and a detainer may be placed.

(c) A summons or warrant may be issued only within the prisoner's maximum term or terms except that in the case of a prisoner released as if on parole pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4164, such summons or warrant may be issued only within the maximum term or terms, less one hundred eighty days. A summons or warrant shall be considered issued when signed and either—

(1) Placed in the mail or

(2) Sent by electronic transmission to the intended authorities.

(d) The issuance of a warrant under this section operates to bar the expiration of the parolee's sentence. Such warrant maintains the Commission's jurisdiction to retake the parolee either before or after the normal expiration date of the sentence and to reach a final decision as to revocation of parole and forfeiture of time pursuant to § 2.52(c).

(e) A summons or warrant issued pursuant to this section shall be accompanied by a statement of the charges against the parolee, the applicable procedural rights under the Commission's regulations and the possible actions which may be taken by the Commission. A summons shall specify the time and place the parolee shall appear for a revocation hearing. Failure to appear in response to a summons shall be grounds for issuance of a warrant.

[42 FR 39809, Aug. 5, 1977, as amended at 45 FR 84055, Dec. 22, 1980; 54 FR 11688, Mar. 21, 1989; 63 FR 25771, May 11, 1998]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 66 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Gabriel Barrier v. C.W. Beaver, Warden, 712 F.2d 231 (6th Cir. 1983).
Gabriel Barrier v. C.W. Beaver, Warden, 712 F.2d 231 (6th Cir. 1983). · cites it 6× “This section is implemented by 28 C.F.R. section 2.44, which regulation relevantly reads: (b) Any summons or warrant under this section shall be issued as soon as practicable after the alleged violation is reported to the Commission, except when delay is deemed necessary.”
Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78 (1976). · cites it 2× “28 CFR § 2.44 (d) (1976). The issuance of the warrant must be considered the commencement of the parole revocation process, since suspension of the running of a parolee's sentence could not otherwise be justified.”
Sherman v. United States Parole Comm'n, 502 F.3d 869 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 3× “28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (a). Nevertheless, Sherman contends that we should read the lone term “warrant” as implicitly incorporating the • Fourth Amendment definition.”
George I. Benny v. United States Parole Comm'n, 295 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2002). · cites it 2× “The Commission argues that 28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (d) provides guidance on calculating the five-year period.”
Lee C. Martin v. Dennis M. Luther, Warden, & United States Parole Comm'n, Respondents, 689 F.2d 109 (7th Cir. 1982). · cites it 3× “It is equally clear to us that if the operative date passes and the Commission has not issued a violator warrant (or a summons) charging a violation of the release terms, the Commission’s supervisory authority over the releasee is at an end, and no violator warrant could be…”
Renee Decuir v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 800 F.2d 1021 (10th Cir. 1986). · cites it 4× “§ 4213 (a); see also 28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (a). Arrest or charge for committing a later crime is expressly contemplated by the parole statutes as one type of “allegation” allowing the issuance of a parole violator warrant.”
Dennis Luther v. Vincent Molina, 627 F.2d 71 (7th Cir. 1980). · cites it 2× “See 28 C.F.R. §§ 2.44 , et seq. If a parolee is alleged to have violated his parole the Commission under § 4213 may either summon the parolee to a § 4214 revocation hearing or issue a warrant and retake the parolee.”
Dietz v. Sanders, 100 F. App'x 334 (6th Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (c). Petitioner has not correctly calculated the expiration date of his maximum term of imprisonment.”
United States v. Augustin Gonzalez, 71 F.3d 819 (11th Cir. 1996). “1, 1986); 28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (a)(2) (1991). Shortly thereafter, this warrant was delivered to the United States Marshal for the Southern District of Florida, see 28 C.”
John William Russie v. United States Dep't of Just., United States Parole Comm'n, United States Marshal, & King Cnty. Jail, 708 F.2d 1445 (9th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (c) (1982). Russie had completed his one-year prison term, minus a good-time allowance, and was within 77 days of the completion of his maximum sentence when the warrant against him was issued on May 13.”
Larry Dean Turner v. United States Parole Comm'n Jack Cowley, Warden Attorney Gen. of the United States, 934 F.2d 254 (10th Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “Nor does any provision foreclose the possibility of issuing a new warrant upon the production of new persuasive evidence of a violation.”
John Larry Ray v. Patricia Pickett, J. Alan MacDoniel U.S. Parole Comm'r, 734 F.2d 370 (8th Cir. 1984). “28 C.F.R. § 2.44 . Once a warrant has been issued, the parolee is afforded a preliminary interview before a probation officer, other than the officer who recommended that the warrant issue, to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that there is a violation of the…”
— 28 C.F.R. § 2.44(a) — 1 case
George I. Benny v. United States Parole Comm'n, 295 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2002). “The Commission argues that 28 C.F.R. § 2.44 (d) provides guidance on calculating the five-year period.”
— 28 C.F.R. § 2.44(d) — 2 cases
Gabriel Barrier v. C.W. Beaver, Warden, 712 F.2d 231 (6th Cir. 1983). “This section is implemented by 28 C.F.R. section 2.44, which regulation relevantly reads: (b) Any summons or warrant under this section shall be issued as soon as practicable after the alleged violation is reported to the Commission, except when delay is deemed necessary.”
Martin v. Luther, 515 F. Supp. 745 (N.D. Ill. 1981).
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.