28 C.F.R. § 570.20
Purpose
The purpose of this subpart is to provide the procedures of the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) for designating inmates to pre-release community confinement or home detention.
(a) Community confinement is defined as residence in a community treatment center, halfway house, restitution center, mental health facility, alcohol or drug rehabilitation center, or other community correctional facility (including residential re-entry centers); and participation in gainful employment, employment search efforts, community service, vocational training, treatment, educational programs, or similar facility-approved programs during non-residential hours.
(b) Home detention is defined as a program of confinement and supervision that restricts the defendant to his place of residence continuously, except for authorized absences, enforced by appropriate means of surveillance by the probation office or other monitoring authority.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 52
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2005–2025 · leading case: Edward J. Wedelstedt v. Ron Wiley, Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst.—camp Florence, Colorado, 477 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 2007).
Edward J. Wedelstedt v. Ron Wiley, Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst.—camp Florence, Colorado, 477 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 2007). “Wedel-stedt argued the regulations, codified at 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 and 570.21, are inconsistent with clear congressional intent articulated in 18 U.”
Rodriguez v. Smith, 541 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. 2008). “We conclude that the BOP's categorical exercise of discretion as promulgated in 28 C.F.R §§ 570.20 and 570.21 violates Congress's intention regarding the statutory inmate placement and transfer considerations the BOP must undertake, and we affirm the district court's decision.”
Elliott Levine v. Craig Apker, 455 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2006). “28 C.F.R. § 570.20 . The new regulation expressly prohibits placement of prisoners in CCCs prior to the pre-release phase of imprisonment and provides: When will the Bureau designate inmates to community confinement? (a) The Bureau will designate inmates to community confinement…”
Demis v. Sniezek, 558 F.3d 508 (6th Cir. 2009). “Specifically, Demis argued that the BOP’s regulations, codified at 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 and 570.21, are inconsistent with the requisite individualized consideration of the factors regarding prisoner transfer set forth in 18 U.”
Garza v. Davis, 596 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2010). “§§ 3621 (b) and 3624(c), and 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 and 570.21. Mr. Garza also alleged that officials are denying graduates of the BOP Residential Drug and Alcohol Program (“RDAP”) a sentence reduction in conjunction with an RRC placement, in violation of federal law and prison…”
Sacora v. Thomas, 628 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2010). “21, 2008) (codified at 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 -.22). Noting that the statutory deadline of July 8, 2008, had passed, the BOP determined that “[ajdopting these rules through the normal notice-and-comment procedures would not be consistent with the short statutory time-frame provided…”
Woodall v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 432 F.3d 235 (3rd Cir. 2005). “28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 , 570.21 (emphasis added).”
Dennis Fults v. Linda Sanders, Warden, Fci-Fc, 442 F.3d 1088 (8th Cir. 2006). “28 C.F.R. § 570.20 states: (a) This subpart provides the Bureau of Prisons’ (Bureau) categorical exercise of discretion for designating inmates to community confinement.”
Hacker v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 450 F. Supp. 2d 705 (E.D. Mich. 2006). “However, after the issuance of a memorandum opinion on December 13, 2002 by the Attorney General’s Office of Legal Counsel (hereinafter “OLC”) and the subsequent publication of 28 C.F.R. § 570.20 and 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 , the BOP no longer has the discretionary authority to place…”
Bun v. Wiley, 351 F. App'x 267 (10th Cir. 2009). “§§ 3621 (b) and 3624(c), and 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 and 570.21. The district court dismissed his petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.”
Jasperson v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 460 F. Supp. 2d 76 (D.D.C. 2006). “1 (Designation); see 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 -.21. Jasperson challenges the validity of these regulations and asks the court to order BOP to conduct an individualized assessment in order to determine if he should be placed in a CCC.”
Putnam v. Winn, 441 F. Supp. 2d 253 (D. Mass. 2006). “The rule was codified in 28 C.F.R. §§ 570.20 , 570.21. § 570.20 What is the purpose of this subpart? (a) This subpart provides the Bureau of Prisons’ (Bureau) categorical exercise of discretion for designating inmates to community confinement.”
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.