(a) In an effort to maintain a safe and orderly environment within its institutions, the Bureau of Prisons operates control unit programs intended to place into a separate unit those inmates who are unable to function in a less restrictive environment without being a threat to others or to the orderly operation of the institution. The Bureau of Prisons provides written criteria for the:
(1) Referral of an inmate for possible placement within a control unit;
(2) Selection of an inmate for placement within a control unit;
(3) Regular review of an inmate while housed in a control unit; and
(4) Release of an inmate from a control unit.
(b) The Bureau of Prisons provides an inmate confined within a control unit the opportunity to participate in programs and activities restricted as necessary to protect the security, good order, or discipline of the unit.
Notes of Decisions
Ajaj v. United States, 293 F. App'x 575 (10th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “, inmates “who are unable to function in a less -3- restrictive environment,” 28 C.F.R. § 541.40 – must have an “opportunity to receive a minimum of seven hours weekly recreation outside of the cell.”
John Stanley Campbell v. H.G. Miller, 787 F.2d 217 (7th Cir. 1986).
“” 28 C.F.R. § 541.40 (a) (1985). The security status of a prisoner may justify reasonable steps restricting his direct access to legal materials.”
United States v. Darryl Lamont Johnson, 223 F.3d 665 (7th Cir. 2000).
“40 (a) (“in an effort to maintain a safe and orderly environment within its institutions, the Bureau of Prisons operates control unit programs intended to place into a separate unit those inmates who are unable to function in a less restrictive environment without being a threat…”
Jackson v. Carlson, 707 F.2d 943 (7th Cir. 1983).
· cites it 2× “1980); 28 C.F.R. § 541.40 . We held in McCollum v.”
McMillan v. Wiley, 813 F. Supp. 2d 1238 (D. Colo. 2011).
“See 28 C.F.R. §§ 541.40 -.50 (2007). Plaintiff claims that he was deprived of the process he was due as a result of BOP’s designation of D Unit as a general population unit and consequent elimination of protections afforded to individuals designated to a control unit.”
Derek Capozzi v. Bryan Bledsoe, 560 F. App'x 157 (3rd Cir. 2014).
“He claimed that, because the SMU is the “functional equivalent” of the BOP’s “control unit” that is described in 28 C.F.R. § 541.40 et seq., the BOP’s implementation of the SMU program via program statement, rather than by regulation, violated the Due Process Clause, the…”
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.