28 C.F.R. § 570.21

Time-frames

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

(a) Community confinement. Inmates may be designated to community confinement as a condition of pre-release custody and programming during the final months of the inmate's term of imprisonment, not to exceed twelve months.

(b) Home detention. Inmates may be designated to home detention as a condition of pre-release custody and programming during the final months of the inmate's term of imprisonment, not to exceed the shorter of ten percent of the inmate's term of imprisonment or six months.

(c) Exceeding time-frames. These time-frames may be exceeded when separate statutory authority allows greater periods of community confinement as a condition of pre-release custody.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Elliott Levine v. Craig Apker, 455 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2006).
Elliott Levine v. Craig Apker, 455 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2006). · cites it 8× “(b) We may exceed these time-frames only when specific Bureau programs allow greater periods of community confinement, as provided by separate statutory authority (for example, residential substance abuse treatment program .”
Jones v. Zenk, 495 F. Supp. 2d 1289 (N.D. Ga. 2007). · cites it 18× “See 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 (hereinafter referred to as the “RRC Placement Rule”).”
Demis v. Sniezek, 558 F.3d 508 (6th Cir. 2009). · cites it 3× “28 C.F.R. § 570.21 . 1 Demis asserted that § 570.”
Edward J. Wedelstedt v. Ron Wiley, Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst.—camp Florence, Colorado, 477 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 2007). · cites it 4× “” 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 (a). Section 570.20 establishes the purpose of the regulations as a “categorical exercise of discretion for designating inmates .”
Bell v. Wiley, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1168 (D. Colo. 2007). · cites it 23× “Applicant filed this action challenging a Bureau of Prisons’ regulation, 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 , that limits a federal prisoner’s placement in a community corrections center to the last ten percent of his prison sentence, not to exceed six months.”
Garza v. Davis, 596 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2010). “21, 2008) (codified at 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 (a) (2009)) (interim rule revising BOP regulations to conform with the Second Chance Act of 2007).”
Hacker v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 450 F. Supp. 2d 705 (E.D. Mich. 2006). · cites it 3× “20 and 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 , the BOP no longer has the discretionary authority to place an offender in a CCC based upon criteria set forth under 18 U.”
Rodriguez v. Smith, 541 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 570.21 . [4] Section 3624(c) was amended effective April 9, 2008, slightly rewording the affirmative duty of the BOP to ensure to the extent practicable the release of a prisoner during the final months of the prisoner's term.”
Michael Richmond v. Joseph Scibana, Warden, Fed. Corr. Inst. at Oxford, Wisconsin, 387 F.3d 602 (7th Cir. 2004). “-18, 2004) (adding a new 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 ). The rule has not yet been promulgated; the comment period lasts until October 18, 2004.”
Pimentel v. Gonzales, 367 F. Supp. 2d 365 (E.D.N.Y 2005). · cites it 2× “nted and respondent is ordered, in good faith, to consider the appropriateness of transferring the petitioner to a community confinement center in light of the factors set forth in Section 3621(b) and any additional factors deemed appropriate by the BOP, without reference to the…”
Brock v. United States Dep't of Just., 256 F. App'x 748 (6th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “032)(“In accordance with 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 , the Bureau of Prisons will designate inmates to community confinement only as part of prerelease custody and programming, during the last ten percent of the prison sentence being served, not to exceed six months.”
Dennis Fults v. Linda Sanders, Warden, Fci-Fc, 442 F.3d 1088 (8th Cir. 2006). “28 C.F.R. § 570.21 states: (a) The Bureau will designate inmates to community confinement only as part of pre-release custody and programming, during the last ten percent of the prison sentence being served, not to exceed six months.”
— 28 C.F.R. § 570.21(a) — 2 cases
Jones v. Zenk, 495 F. Supp. 2d 1289 (N.D. Ga. 2007). “See 28 C.F.R. § 570.21 (hereinafter referred to as the “RRC Placement Rule”).”
Cathy Marie Lantz v. Comm'r, 132 T.C. No. 8 (Tax Ct. 2009).
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.