United States District Court, D. Nevada
before the court is defendant Daniel Parlin's motion for
judicial recommendation. (ECF No. 228). The United States
(“government”) has not filed a response, and the
time for doing so has passed.
16, 2016, the court sentenced Parlin to 87 months'
custody to be followed by three years of supervised released
for conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and (C), and
for conspiracy to commit money laundering in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(A)(i), (B)(i), and (B)(ii). (ECF
Nos. 165, 171).
September 16, 2019, Parlin filed the instant motion
requesting that the court recommend to the Bureau of Prisons
(“BOP”) that he be considered for placement at a
residential reentry center and for home confinement as soon
as he is eligible, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§
3621(b)(4) and 3624(c)(1). (ECF No. 228).
federal defendant who has been convicted and sentenced to a
term of imprisonment is committed to the custody of the BOP.
18 U.S.C. § 3621(a). The BOP “shall designate the
place of the prisoner's imprisonment.” 18 U.S.C.
§ 3621(b); see United States v. Ceballos, 671
F.3d 852, 855 (9th Cir. 2011) (recognizing that the BOP
“has the statutory authority to choose the locations
where prisoners serve their sentence”).
to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621(b) and 3624(c), the BOP has
discretion to place an inmate in a residential reentry center
(“RRC”) and/or home confinement. See Sacora
v. Thomas, 628 F.3d 1059, 1061-62 (9th Cir. 2010)
(recognizing that these two “statutory provisions
govern the BOP's authority to place inmates in its
custody in RRCs”). Section 3621(b) authorizes the BOP
to “designate the place of the prisoner's
imprisonment” upon consideration of, in pertinent part:
(4) any statement by the court that imposed the sentence-
(A) concerning the purposes for which the sentence to
imprisonment was determined to be warranted; or
(B) recommending a type of penal or correctional facility as
18 U.S.C. §§ 3621(b)(4)(A)-(B).
3624(c)(1), as amended by the Second Chance Act
(“SCA”), states that the BOP “shall, to the
extent practicable, ensure that a prisoner serving a term of
imprisonment spends a portion of the final months of that
term … under conditions that will afford that prisoner
a reasonable opportunity to adjust to and prepare for the
reentry of that prisoner into the community.” 18 U.S.C.
§ 3624(c)(1). An appropriate placement may include an
RRC or home confinement. 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(1)-(2). The
SCA also requires the BOP to issue regulations designed to
ensure that RRC placements are (1) “conducted in a
manner consistent with section 3621(b), ” (2)
“determined on an individual basis, ” and (3)
“of sufficient duration to provide the greatest
likelihood of successful reintegration into the
community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(6).
contends that the requested judicial recommendation is
warranted for a number of reasons. (ECF No. 228). Parlin
first argues that the court has the authority to make such a
recommendation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621(b)(4)
and 3624(c). Id. Parlin then notes that his counsel
could have made this request at the time of sentencing but
neglected to do so. Id. Additionally, Parlin submits
that during his approximately three years of incarceration,
he has become an orderly for the administration building at
his facility, has completed over fifty ...