Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Grimm

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 26, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiffs,
v.
STEVEN GRIMM, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

         Presently before the court is petitioner Eve Mazzarella's (“petitioner”) motion for judicial recommendation for legal furlough. (ECF No. 693). The United States of America (the “government”) filed a response (ECF No. 695), to which petitioner replied (ECF No. 697).

         I. Facts

         Petitioner was convicted on 12 counts of mortgage fraud after a trial by jury in December 2011. (ECF No. 693 at 2); (ECF No. 363). On March 30, 2012, District Judge Hunt sentenced petitioner to 14 years per count, to be served concurrently, followed by a term of supervised release. (ECF No. 439).

         Following trial, petitioner filed both an appeal of her convictions with the Ninth Circuit and two motions for a new trial with the district court-both of which were denied. (ECF Nos. 528, 555). In April 2015, the Ninth Circuit vacated the court's denials of petitioner's motions for new trial and remanded for discovery and an evidentiary hearing as to the issues raised. (ECF Nos. 603, 609).

         After a hearing in December 2015, the court again denied petitioner's motion for a new trial. (ECF No. 656). The Ninth Circuit affirmed the court's order in July 2017. (ECF Nos. 680, 681). Following her appeal, petitioner filed a § 2255 motion to vacate, amend, or correct sentence “based on issues never previously raised before the court due to dependence on evidence outside the record.” (ECF No. 693 at 2).

         In conjunction with her § 2255 motion, petitioner has filed the instant motion for legal furlough pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 570.30 et seq. for the purpose of assisting her counsel prepare for and brief the issues related to her motion to vacate, amend, or correct sentence. (ECF No. 693).

         II. Legal Standard

         18 U.S.C. § 3622 allows for the temporary release of prisoners in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) if such release “appears to be consistent with the public interest and if there is reasonable cause to believe that a prisoner will honor the trust to be imposed in him. . .” 18 U.S.C. § 3622. If the prisoner meets these requirements, he or she may be authorized to “visit a designated place for a period not to exceed thirty days, and then return to the same or another facility, for the purpose of. . . engaging in any other significant activity consistent with the public interest.” Id.

         The two types of furloughs are:

(a) Transfer furlough --A furlough for the purpose of transferring an inmate from one Bureau facility to another, a non-federal facility, or community confinement (including home confinement) as noted below at § 570.33(a).
(b) Non-transfer furlough --A furlough for any purpose other than a transfer furlough, and which may be defined based on its nature, as either emergency or routine, as follows:
(1) Emergency furlough --A furlough allowing an inmate to address a family crisis or other urgent situation as noted below at § 570.33(b).[1]
(2) Routine furlough --A furlough for any of the reasons noted below at ยง 570.33 (a) ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.