Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
top of page

BOP COVID-19 UPDATE -- March 3, 2021

Want this gorgeous view? Three offices just became available in our first-class suite. Call (917) 562-4000

Quick Facts:

Currently positive-testing inmates: 818 (down from 1,043)

Currently positive-testing staff: 1,620 (up from 1,616)

Recovered inmates: 46,933 (up from 46,758)

Recovered staff: 4,897 (up from 4,891)

Institutions with the largest number of currently positive-testing inmates:

Florence High USP: 119 (down from 121)

Fort Dix FCI: 40

Manchester FCI: 36

Institutions with the largest number of currently positive-testing staff:

Pollock USP: 83 (unchanged)

Tucson USP: 69 (unchanged)

Talladega FCI: 46 (unchanged)

System-wide testing results: Presently, BOP has 124,743 federal inmates in BOP-managed institutions and 13,963 in community-based facilities. Today's stats:

Completed tests: 105,988 (up from 105,951)

Positive tests: 46,901 (up from 46,965)

Case Note: District Court's ambiguous references to controlling procedure requires remand...

In U.S. v. Tallon, No. 20-12596, 2021 WL 727806 (11th Cir. Feb. 25, 2021) (unpublished), the district court's ambiguous references to controlling procedure required remand for clarification: The district court's order denying compassionate release said that Tallon “ha[d] not provided extraordinary and compelling evidence to warrant a compassionate release” and “release on home confinement (as suggested by the defendant) is not a type of relief authorized by 18U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A).” Tallon appeals this denial. "Tallon argues the district court erred for two reasons. First, he alleges that the district court incorrectly applied an 'extraordinary and compelling evidence' standard rather than the 'extraordinary and compelling reason' standard articulated in § 3582(c)(1)(A). Second, he argues that the district court erred by ruling that the statute does not authorize the relief he requested. … First, the district court said that Tallon had not provided “extraordinary and compelling evidence” to warrant compassionate release. We cannot determine whether the district court simply misstated the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” language of § 3582(c)(1)(A) or whether it required a heightened evidentiary showing to grant compassionate relief in this case. Because it is unclear which standard the district court used to evaluate Tallon's motion, we vacate and remand this order for the district court to explain which standard it applied. Second, we cannot determine what the district court meant by saying “release on home confinement (as suggested by the defendant) is not a type of relief authorized by 18U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A). … By way of background, the parties agree that the district court had the authority to reduce Tallon's sentence to time served and impose a term of supervised released with home confinement as a condition of that supervised release under § 3582(c)(1)(A). At the same time, the BOP, but not the judiciary, has the authority to “place a prisoner in home confinement” directly for 'the shorter of 10 percent of the term of imprisonment of that prisoner or 6 months.' 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2).The district court's statement that release on home confinement is not authorized under§ 3582(c)(1)(A)could be interpreted in at least two ways. On the one hand, the district court might have believed that it did not have the authority the BOP does to grant home confinement directly like that provided for in§ 3624(c)(2). Under this reading, we find no error in the district court's statement as a matter of law.4On the other hand, the district court might have believed that any of the relief Tallon requested (including a reduced sentence combined with supervised release and a condition of home confinement) is not available under§ 3582(c)(1)(A), which would constitute legal error. On remand, the district court should clarify this statement so we can meaningfully review its order denying Tallon relief.”

Death Watch: The BOP reports no new COVID-related fatalities, but has identified a previously tallied but unidentified inmate fatality as Johnathan Delargy, 60, of FCI Seagoville. Inmate fatalities remain at 224. Four of these inmates died while on home confinement. Staff fatalities remain at 4.

96 views0 comments


bottom of page