United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge.
the Court for disposition is Defendant Dartanine Ransom's
Motion for Recommendation for Residential Re-entry Center.
For the following reasons, this Motion will denied without
prejudice to Defendant re-filing it at a later date.
August 27, 2009, Defendant, Dartanine Ransom, pled guilty to
an information charging him with Conspiracy to distribute and
possession with intent to distribute more than 5 grams of
cocaine base known as crack in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(B)(iii). Mr. Ransom was
subsequently sentenced on July 23, 2010 to 188 months with a
4 year term of supervised release to follow.Since his
placement within Bureau of Prisons (BOP) custody, Mr. Ransom
has completed a number of programs, including Residential
Drug Abuse Program (RDAP). He has, however, also accumulated three
infractions on his disciplinary record: disruptive conduct on
September 9, 2017; and possession of an unauthorized item on
both March 20, 2015, and December 6, 2014. Mr. Ransom's
projected release date is June 21, 2020.
February 5, 2018, Mr. Ranson filed the instant motion
requesting that a recommendation that his sentence include
the maximum time allowed in a halfway house or other
community corrections facility. This matter has since been fully
18 of the United States Code, Section 3621(b) provides that
“[t]he Bureau of Prisons shall designate the place of
the prisoner's imprisonment.” Furthermore,
concerning pre-release custody, Section 3624(c) provides
that, to the extent practicable, the Bureau of Prisons shall:
ensure that a prisoner serving a term of imprisonment spends
a portion of the final months of that term (not to exceed 12
months), under conditions that will afford that prisoner a
reasonable opportunity to adjust to and prepare for the
reentry of that prisoner into the community. Such conditions
may include a community correctional facility.
making this determination, the Bureau is directed to consider
“any statement by the court that imposed the sentence [
] recommending a type of penal or correctional facility as
appropriate.” One of five factors for consideration, the
recommendation of a sentencing court regarding where a
prisoner should be housed, has “no binding
effect” on the BOP's decision.
considering an individual's eligibility for pre-release
placement in an community correctional facility, the BOP is
required to ensure that decisions are made: “(A)
consistent with the five factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b);
(B) on an individualized basis; and (C) so that the duration
of the placement period gives the inmate the greatest
likelihood of successful community
reintegration. In addition, the factors set forth in
section 3621(b), a prisoner's participation in Inmate
Skills Development programs within the institution, is
considered to determine if additional placement time is
warranted under the Federal prisoner reentry initiative,
codified at 42 U.S.C. § 17541. BOP policy dictates that
“all ‘inmates must now be reviewed for prerelease
RRC placements 17-19 months before their projected release
instant matter, the record indicates that Defendant is
currently projected to be released on June 21, 2010, or
approximately 26 months from now.Pursuant to BOP policy,
and based on this release date, Defendant will not be
reviewed for pre-release resident for another six months. I
therefore find that the instant motion should be denied at
this time and any recommendation to the BOP regarding Mr.
Ransom's placement will be deferred.
Mr. Ransom's motion is denied at this time, I do so
without prejudice to Mr. Ransom re-filing this motion in four
to six months, with up-to-date information concerning his
prison conduct and rehabilitative efforts. With this
additional time, Mr. Ransom will have the opportunity to
bolster his prison record and show a resistance to prison
on the above, Defendant Dartanine Ransom's Motion for
Recommendation for Residential Re-entry Center is denied at
this time. Mr. Ransom may, if he ...