The federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is still trying to implement the First Step Act (FSA) over five years after the legislation was signed into law by then-President Trump. While the calculation of FSA credits to reduce a prison term for federal prisoners has mostly been fixed, a lack of space to put the prisoners at halfway houses is now causing problems. The result is that many, potentially thousands, of prisoners are staying in institutions longer than necessary awaiting bed-space at halfway houses.
A case in the federal District of Kansas will likely set the trend for forcing the BOP to make changes to comply with FSA. FSA has two key components; 1) it allows prisoners, mostly minimum security, to earn credits to reduce their sentence by up to a year by participating in programming or productive activities, and 2) for those credits earned beyond the year, prisoners can earn up to 15 days/month toward additional home confinement. That home confinement is managed primarily by halfway house staff, private or non-profit organizations who contract with the BOP that are supposed to help with the transition from prison to the community.
Since the FSA law went into effect, most of the prisoners receiving credits were for the 365 days that reduced the sentence. Now, as time passes, more and more prisoners are not only getting their sentences reduced but they also have earned credits that should allow them to be transferred to home confinement, some for over a year. The BOP has known this problem would eventually present itself and with each passing day it is getting worse.
Alphonso Woodley was supposed to be transferred to a halfway house in the Orlando, FL area, a place noted for limited halfway house space. Woodley filed a habeas corpus motion alleging his rights were violated because the BOP was holding him in prison when he should have been transferred to home confinement. The BOP’s initial response did not address Woodley’s main complaint but that Woodley had not exhausted his administrative remedy to have the BOP try to address his issue prior to going to court.
The administrative remedy process in the BOP is archaic. Prisoners take their concerns first to their case manager on a form known as a BP-8. The forms are triplicate and must be filled out by hand. Also, the forms are not readily available and must be handed out by the case manager, who is usually not looking for additional work. Once the case manager denies it or 30 days have passed with no answer, a BP-10 is filed to be sent to the Warden ... then a BP-10 to regional office .. .then a BP-11 to BOP’s headquarters in Washington DC. To go through the entire process could take up to 6 months, or more. Many prisoners believe many of the administrative remedies end up in the trash because the BOP does not electronically track them and responses are usually sent to prisoners in the mail. The system is broken.
For Woodley, he went straight to court because the regional BOP authority has taken over his prison, placing it on lockdown. The forms he needed were not even available to him and each day in prison was, he believed, a violation of his rights. A federal judge agreed as well that exhaustion was not necessary and proceeded to rule on Woodley’s case.
Woodley had done what the BOP asked of him. He participated in programming earning FSA credits that reduced his 10 year sentence for a drug offense. He further completed a residential drug program that reduced his sentence yet another year. Woodley also kept earning FSA credits that would place him in home confinement for 445 days. As a result, he should have been sent to live at home under strict rules some time ago. Instead, he languished in prison and then filed this motion when the BOP said that he would be transferred on September 4, 2024 when there was room for him to be monitored by the halfway house. The issues is that the BOP does not have such discretion as FSA states that the BOP “Shall” transfer eligible inmates to home confinement.
The BOP argued that the place of Woodley’s confinement falls within the BOP’s discretion and that the Court has no authority to interfere. However, U.S. District Judge John W. Lungstrum disagreed. The BOP admitted that Woodley is eligible for transfer to home confinement but that there was no room for him at the halfway house. Judge Lungstrum stated, “Respondent’s [BOP’s] excuse for delaying petitioner’s transfer to an RRC is that bed space is not available in a particular RRC until September. No such condition concerning bed availability is included among the requirements for eligibility under Section 3624(g), however, and thus immediate placement in prerelease custody is nevertheless required under Section 3632(d)(4)(C).”
Judge Lungstrum said that the BOP is to “ensure there is sufficient prerelease custody capacity to accommodate all eligible prisoners.” In the case of Woodley, the judge wrote, “Accordingly, because the BOP’s failure to transfer petitioner to prerelease custody violates federal law, the Court grants the petition for relief.”
Woodley is now on home confinement in the Orlando area finishing his prison term, even though the BOP said just before the ruling that there was no room there. Many other prisoners sit in prison because Judge Lungstrum only ruled for Woodley ... but Woodley may have paved the way for them to get home sooner. (See Judge Lungstrum’s Order here).
Not only is the judge’s ruling consistent with the FSA, it also aligns with current BOP Director Colette Peters’ comments she made regarding a study of inmates transferred to home confinement under the CARES Act during Covid-19. Peters stated, “This study reinforces my belief, shaped by decades of experience in corrections, that alternatives to mass incarceration are the most effective approach. The findings that individuals with a CARES assignment recidivated no more or less than comparable people in home confinement, and even less often post-release, are encouraging. This study suggests that reducing incarceration for appropriate people through measures like early and extended home confinement does not compromise public safety and in fact, suggests it may contribute to successful reintegration into society.”
Time to put those words into action.
Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn or Forbes. Check out my website or some of my other work here.
Article originally published on Forbes.com by Walter Pavlo (June 30 2024)
