Compassionate release granted to individual with hypertension, asthma, and diabetes who had served 21 months of 60-month sentence. Defendant had several disciplinary infractions and had pretrial bond revoked due to obstruction of justice, but Court found that defendant posed no danger to the community. Extended term of supervised release imposed. Government argued that since it had its own process for evaluating for release, the Defendant was "cutting in line" by seeking compassionate release. Judge Levy forcefully rejected this argument: "This 'cutting in line' argument offends the Court" and "is without merit." Id. at *5. And while there were no confirmed cases in the facilty, the court held that "[z]ero confirmed COVID-19 cases is not the same thing as zero COVID-19 cases" and "unless and until FCI Loretto implements a universal testing regimen, the Court gives no weight to the zero 'confirmed' COVID-19 cases statistic." Id. at *6.
United States v. Amarrah, No. 17-20464 (JEL), 2020 WL 2220008 (E.D. Mich. May 7, 2020)
DETAILS
Decision
Date
5/7/2020
Practice Area
Criminal (Federal Charges)
Relief Requested
Release
Type of Court
Federal District Court
Location
Michigan
Type of Case
Individual
Case Characteristics
Elderly, Post-Conviction Detention [jail or prison], Pre-Existing Health Conditions, Pretrial Detention [jail]
Release Granted
Yes
Compassionate Release Case
Yes
Compassionate Release Specific Characteristics
Has a disciplinary history, Only served a small portion of their sentence (less than 33%)
14 day quarantine period at the prison; 75 months supervised release: 12 months home confinement, followed by 27 months with curfew, and 36 months in original conditions of supervised release
Convictions
Conspiracy to pay and receive healthcare kickbacks; Payment or receipt of kickbacks in connection with a federal healthcare program (four counts)
Case Status
Decision Made
Compassionate Release Exhaustion Holdingsin Federal Case
An individual can move for compassionate release after 30 days have passed from the date the application was submitted to the warden, irrespective of whether the warden has granted or denied the request., Other, The parties agreed at the May 6, 2020 hearing that the 30-day exhaustion requirement is not an impediment to the court’s deciding the pending merits of the Motion.
Crowdsourced legal documents from around the country related to COVID-19 and incarceration, organized, collected, and summarized for public defenders, litigators, and other advocates. Created and managed by Bronx Defenders, Columbia Law School’s Center for Institutional and Social Change, UCLA Law COVID-19 Behind Bars Data Project, and Zealous. Mostly federal court opinions, but now expanding to states and legal filings, declarations, and exhibits.
This resource is designed to help lawyers, advocates, researchers, journalists, and others interested in challenging, remedying, or drawing attention to the grave risk that Covid-19 poses to individuals who are detained.