U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART III— PRISONS AND PRISONERS › Chapter CHAPTER 306— TRANSFER TO OR FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES

18 U.S.C. § 4106A

Transfer of offenders on parole; parole of offenders transferred

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Upon the receipt of an offender who is on parole from the authorities of a foreign country, the Attorney General shall assign the offender to the United States Parole Commission for supervision.(b)(1)(A) The United States Parole Commission shall, without unnecessary delay, determine a release date and a period and conditions of supervised release for an offender transferred to the United States to serve a sentence of imprisonment, as though the offender were convicted in a United States district court of a similar offense.(B) In making such determination, the United States Parole Commission shall consider—(i) any recommendation of the United States Probation Service, including any recommendation as to the applicable guideline range; and(ii) any documents provided by the transferring country;relating to that offender.(C) The combined periods of imprisonment and supervised release that result from such determination shall not exceed the term of imprisonment imposed by the foreign court on that offender.(D) The duties conferred on a United States probation officer with respect to a defendant by section 3552 of this title shall, with respect to an offender so transferred, be carried out by the United States Probation Service.(2)(A) A determination by the United States Parole Commission under this subsection may be appealed to the United States court of appeals for the circuit in which the offender is imprisoned at the time of the determination of such Commission. Notice of appeal must be filed not later than 45 days after receipt of notice of such determination.(B) The court of appeals shall decide and dispose of the appeal in accordance with section 3742 of this title as though the determination appealed had been a sentence imposed by a United States district court.(3) During the supervised release of an offender under this subsection, the United States district court for the district in which the offender resides shall supervise the offender.(c) This section shall apply only to offenses committed on or after November 1, 1987.(Added Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7101(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4415; amended Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXV, §§ 3599B, 3599C, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4931, 4932.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–647, § 3599B, inserted “of” before second reference to “offenders” in section catchline.

Subsec. (b)(1)(C). Pub. L. 101–647, § 3599C, inserted period at end.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Adebola Olumbunm Ajala v. United States Parole Comm'n, 997 F.2d 651 (9th Cir. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Adebola Olumbunm Ajala v. United States Parole Comm'n, 997 F.2d 651 (9th Cir. 1993). · cites it 8× “FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judge: Adebola Olumbunm Ajala, who was convicted in England and transferred to the United States to serve the remainder of her sentence, challenges the determination of the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) establishing her release date pursuant…”
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000). · cites it 6× “Furthermore, the district judge did not even have jurisdiction to adapt Bishop’s Bahamian sentence because Congress has charged the Parole Commission with the authority to translate a foreign sentence of a transferee into a sentence recognized under United States law.”
Chris Hansen v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 904 F.2d 306 (5th Cir. 1990). · cites it 7× “Hansen complains that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, which governs the transfer of foreign offenders, was incorrectly interpreted and applied by the Parole Commission and improperly vests sentencing authority in the Parole Commission.”
Karl L. Cannon v. U.S. Dep't of Just., United States Parole Comm'n, 973 F.2d 1190 (5th Cir. 1992). · cites it 6× “The Commission suggests that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A only requires the Commission to determine a discretionary release date and that it must do so without respect to the 18 U.”
Comfort Asare, Reg. No. 03671-000 v. United States Parole Comm'n, 2 F.3d 540 (4th Cir. 1993). · cites it 7× “In this case that was done by the United States Parole Commission under the authority of 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, but the Parole Commission refused to apply credits for good behavior earned by Asare in England and expected to be earned by her under the laws of the United States,…”
Odili v. United States Parole Comm'n, 474 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2007). · cites it 7× “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, the United States Parole Commission eon-véned a transfer treaty hearing to set a release date and a period and conditions of supervised release for Odili to complete the service of his foreign sentence.”
Erma J. James v. United States Parole Comm'n, 159 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 1998). · cites it 4× “She was transferred to the United States pursuant to a prisoner exchange treaty with Mexico, and the Commission calculated her release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4106A(a)-(b). We have jurisdiction to review the Commission’s determination under 18 U.”
Zoran Zecevic v. United States Parole Comm'n, 163 F.3d 731 (2d Cir. 1998). · cites it 3× “On November 24, 1997, a United States Parole Commission Examiner held a hearing to determine Zecevic’s release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A). 2 Following the hearing, the Examiner found that (1) Zecevic’s foreign offense was most similar to Importing a Controlled…”
Frascarelli v. United States Parole Comm'n, 857 F.3d 701 (5th Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “” Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A), the United States Parole Commission (the “Commission”) determined that the federal offense most analogous to Frascarelli’s crime was second-degree murder and analyzed his release date accordingly.”
Roman Eleuterio Smythe v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 312 F.3d 383 (8th Cir. 2002). · cites it 5× “Sentencing Guidelines Manual to Smythe’s case as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(B)(i). The examiner determined Smythe’s offense level to be 43 under U.”
James Edward Verner v. United States Parole Comm'n, 150 F.3d 1172 (10th Cir. 1998). · cites it 6× “Waiver The Commission first argues that Verner waived his right to challenge the *1175 authority of the United States to impose his sentenee under 18 U.S.C. § 4106A. Pursuant to § 4107(b)(2), Vemer allegedly consented to the condition that “the sentence .”
Gomez v. United States Parole Comm'n, 829 F.3d 398 (5th Cir. 2016). · cites it 3× “18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(A). In June 2014, a probation officer prepared a post-sentence investigation report (PSR), recommending, inter alia, the most analogous offense to Gomez’ homicide and injuries conviction was second-degree murder, in violation of 18 U.”
Show all 64 citing cases →
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(2)(A) — 1 case
Russell v. United States Parole Comm'n, 16 F. App'x 841 (10th Cir. 2001).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(a) — 3 cases
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000). “Furthermore, the district judge did not even have jurisdiction to adapt Bishop’s Bahamian sentence because Congress has charged the Parole Commission with the authority to translate a foreign sentence of a transferee into a sentence recognized under United States law.”
Erma J. James v. United States Parole Comm'n, 159 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 1998). “She was transferred to the United States pursuant to a prisoner exchange treaty with Mexico, and the Commission calculated her release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4106A(a)-(b). We have jurisdiction to review the Commission’s determination under 18 U.”
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b) — 3 cases
Eluid Trevino-Casares v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 992 F.2d 1068 (10th Cir. 1993).
Huber v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 336 F. App'x 699 (9th Cir. 2009).
Huber v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 336 F. App'x 699 (9th Cir. 2009).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1) — 2 cases
Michael Austin v. United States Parole Comm'n, 448 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2006).
United States v. Roberts, 238 F. App'x 219 (9th Cir. 2007).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A) — 19 cases
Frascarelli v. United States Parole Comm'n, 857 F.3d 701 (5th Cir. 2017). “” Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A), the United States Parole Commission (the “Commission”) determined that the federal offense most analogous to Frascarelli’s crime was second-degree murder and analyzed his release date accordingly.”
Comfort Asare, Reg. No. 03671-000 v. United States Parole Comm'n, 2 F.3d 540 (4th Cir. 1993). “In this case that was done by the United States Parole Commission under the authority of 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, but the Parole Commission refused to apply credits for good behavior earned by Asare in England and expected to be earned by her under the laws of the United States,…”
Adebola Olumbunm Ajala v. United States Parole Comm'n, 997 F.2d 651 (9th Cir. 1993). “FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judge: Adebola Olumbunm Ajala, who was convicted in England and transferred to the United States to serve the remainder of her sentence, challenges the determination of the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) establishing her release date pursuant…”
Zoran Zecevic v. United States Parole Comm'n, 163 F.3d 731 (2d Cir. 1998). “On November 24, 1997, a United States Parole Commission Examiner held a hearing to determine Zecevic’s release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A). 2 Following the hearing, the Examiner found that (1) Zecevic’s foreign offense was most similar to Importing a Controlled…”
Calabria v. United States Parole Comm'n, 227 F. App'x 336 (5th Cir. 2007).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(B) — 1 case
Michael Austin v. United States Parole Comm'n, 448 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2006).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(B)(i) — 2 cases
Roman Eleuterio Smythe v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 312 F.3d 383 (8th Cir. 2002). “Sentencing Guidelines Manual to Smythe’s case as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(B)(i). The examiner determined Smythe’s offense level to be 43 under U.”
Roman E. Smythe v. U.S. Parole Com. (8th Cir. 2002).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(C) — 9 cases
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000). “Furthermore, the district judge did not even have jurisdiction to adapt Bishop’s Bahamian sentence because Congress has charged the Parole Commission with the authority to translate a foreign sentence of a transferee into a sentence recognized under United States law.”
Comfort Asare, Reg. No. 03671-000 v. United States Parole Comm'n, 2 F.3d 540 (4th Cir. 1993). “In this case that was done by the United States Parole Commission under the authority of 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, but the Parole Commission refused to apply credits for good behavior earned by Asare in England and expected to be earned by her under the laws of the United States,…”
Roman Eleuterio Smythe v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 312 F.3d 383 (8th Cir. 2002). “Sentencing Guidelines Manual to Smythe’s case as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(B)(i). The examiner determined Smythe’s offense level to be 43 under U.”
Iljas Cafi v. United States Parole Comm'n, 268 F.3d 467 (7th Cir. 2001).
Calabria v. United States Parole Comm'n, 227 F. App'x 336 (5th Cir. 2007).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(2) — 4 cases
Adebola Olumbunm Ajala v. United States Parole Comm'n, 997 F.2d 651 (9th Cir. 1993). “FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judge: Adebola Olumbunm Ajala, who was convicted in England and transferred to the United States to serve the remainder of her sentence, challenges the determination of the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) establishing her release date pursuant…”
John David Thorpe v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 902 F.2d 291 (5th Cir. 1990).
Odili v. United States Parole Comm'n, 474 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2007). “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, the United States Parole Commission eon-véned a transfer treaty hearing to set a release date and a period and conditions of supervised release for Odili to complete the service of his foreign sentence.”
Contreras v. USPC (5th Cir. 2000).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(2)(A) — 19 cases
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000). “Furthermore, the district judge did not even have jurisdiction to adapt Bishop’s Bahamian sentence because Congress has charged the Parole Commission with the authority to translate a foreign sentence of a transferee into a sentence recognized under United States law.”
Zoran Zecevic v. United States Parole Comm'n, 163 F.3d 731 (2d Cir. 1998). “On November 24, 1997, a United States Parole Commission Examiner held a hearing to determine Zecevic’s release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A). 2 Following the hearing, the Examiner found that (1) Zecevic’s foreign offense was most similar to Importing a Controlled…”
Erma J. James v. United States Parole Comm'n, 159 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 1998). “She was transferred to the United States pursuant to a prisoner exchange treaty with Mexico, and the Commission calculated her release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4106A(a)-(b). We have jurisdiction to review the Commission’s determination under 18 U.”
James Edward Verner v. United States Parole Comm'n, 150 F.3d 1172 (10th Cir. 1998). “Waiver The Commission first argues that Verner waived his right to challenge the *1175 authority of the United States to impose his sentenee under 18 U.S.C. § 4106A. Pursuant to § 4107(b)(2), Vemer allegedly consented to the condition that “the sentence .”
Frascarelli v. United States Parole Comm'n, 857 F.3d 701 (5th Cir. 2017). “” Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A), the United States Parole Commission (the “Commission”) determined that the federal offense most analogous to Frascarelli’s crime was second-degree murder and analyzed his release date accordingly.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(2)(B) — 16 cases
Chris Hansen v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 904 F.2d 306 (5th Cir. 1990). “Hansen complains that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, which governs the transfer of foreign offenders, was incorrectly interpreted and applied by the Parole Commission and improperly vests sentencing authority in the Parole Commission.”
Erma J. James v. United States Parole Comm'n, 159 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 1998). “She was transferred to the United States pursuant to a prisoner exchange treaty with Mexico, and the Commission calculated her release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4106A(a)-(b). We have jurisdiction to review the Commission’s determination under 18 U.”
Navarrete v. United States Parole Comm'n, 34 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 1994).
Odili v. United States Parole Comm'n, 474 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2007). “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, the United States Parole Commission eon-véned a transfer treaty hearing to set a release date and a period and conditions of supervised release for Odili to complete the service of his foreign sentence.”
James Edward Verner v. United States Parole Comm'n, 150 F.3d 1172 (10th Cir. 1998). “Waiver The Commission first argues that Verner waived his right to challenge the *1175 authority of the United States to impose his sentenee under 18 U.S.C. § 4106A. Pursuant to § 4107(b)(2), Vemer allegedly consented to the condition that “the sentence .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(3) — 1 case
Bean v. United States, 89 F. Supp. 2d 828 (E.D. Tex. 2000).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(C) — 3 cases
Frascarelli v. United States Parole Comm'n, 857 F.3d 701 (5th Cir. 2017). “” Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(A), the United States Parole Commission (the “Commission”) determined that the federal offense most analogous to Frascarelli’s crime was second-degree murder and analyzed his release date accordingly.”
Robert Frascarelli v. USPC (5th Cir. 2017).
Robert Frascarelli v. USPC (5th Cir. 2017).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l) — 1 case
Erma J. James v. United States Parole Comm'n, 159 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 1998). “She was transferred to the United States pursuant to a prisoner exchange treaty with Mexico, and the Commission calculated her release date pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4106A(a)-(b). We have jurisdiction to review the Commission’s determination under 18 U.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(A) — 24 cases
Chris Hansen v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 904 F.2d 306 (5th Cir. 1990). “Hansen complains that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, which governs the transfer of foreign offenders, was incorrectly interpreted and applied by the Parole Commission and improperly vests sentencing authority in the Parole Commission.”
Karl L. Cannon v. U.S. Dep't of Just., United States Parole Comm'n, 973 F.2d 1190 (5th Cir. 1992). “The Commission suggests that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A only requires the Commission to determine a discretionary release date and that it must do so without respect to the 18 U.”
Gomez v. United States Parole Comm'n, 829 F.3d 398 (5th Cir. 2016). “18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(A). In June 2014, a probation officer prepared a post-sentence investigation report (PSR), recommending, inter alia, the most analogous offense to Gomez’ homicide and injuries conviction was second-degree murder, in violation of 18 U.”
Navarrete v. United States Parole Comm'n, 34 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 1994).
Comfort Asare, Reg. No. 03671-000 v. United States Parole Comm'n, 2 F.3d 540 (4th Cir. 1993). “In this case that was done by the United States Parole Commission under the authority of 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, but the Parole Commission refused to apply credits for good behavior earned by Asare in England and expected to be earned by her under the laws of the United States,…”
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(B) — 2 cases
Chris Hansen v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 904 F.2d 306 (5th Cir. 1990). “Hansen complains that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, which governs the transfer of foreign offenders, was incorrectly interpreted and applied by the Parole Commission and improperly vests sentencing authority in the Parole Commission.”
Welsh v. United States Parole Comm'n, 513 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 2008).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(B)(i) — 1 case
Odili v. United States Parole Comm'n, 474 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2007). “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, the United States Parole Commission eon-véned a transfer treaty hearing to set a release date and a period and conditions of supervised release for Odili to complete the service of his foreign sentence.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(C) — 9 cases
Adebola Olumbunm Ajala v. United States Parole Comm'n, 997 F.2d 651 (9th Cir. 1993). “FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judge: Adebola Olumbunm Ajala, who was convicted in England and transferred to the United States to serve the remainder of her sentence, challenges the determination of the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) establishing her release date pursuant…”
Karl L. Cannon v. U.S. Dep't of Just., United States Parole Comm'n, 973 F.2d 1190 (5th Cir. 1992). “The Commission suggests that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A only requires the Commission to determine a discretionary release date and that it must do so without respect to the 18 U.”
Odili v. United States Parole Comm'n, 474 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2007). “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4106A, the United States Parole Commission eon-véned a transfer treaty hearing to set a release date and a period and conditions of supervised release for Odili to complete the service of his foreign sentence.”
Roman Eleuterio Smythe v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 312 F.3d 383 (8th Cir. 2002). “Sentencing Guidelines Manual to Smythe’s case as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(1)(B)(i). The examiner determined Smythe’s offense level to be 43 under U.”
Iljas Cafi v. United States Parole Comm'n, 268 F.3d 467 (7th Cir. 2001).
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(b)(l)(D) — 1 case
Adebola Olumbunm Ajala v. United States Parole Comm'n, 997 F.2d 651 (9th Cir. 1993). “FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judge: Adebola Olumbunm Ajala, who was convicted in England and transferred to the United States to serve the remainder of her sentence, challenges the determination of the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) establishing her release date pursuant…”
— 18 U.S.C. § 4106A(c) — 4 cases
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000). “Furthermore, the district judge did not even have jurisdiction to adapt Bishop’s Bahamian sentence because Congress has charged the Parole Commission with the authority to translate a foreign sentence of a transferee into a sentence recognized under United States law.”
Karl L. Cannon v. U.S. Dep't of Just., United States Parole Comm'n, 973 F.2d 1190 (5th Cir. 1992). “The Commission suggests that 18 U.S.C. § 4106A only requires the Commission to determine a discretionary release date and that it must do so without respect to the 18 U.”
Cannon v. U.S. Dept. of Just., U.S. Parole Com'n (5th Cir. 1992).
Bishop v. Reno, 210 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2000).
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.