United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
VOLPE, STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
following recommended disposition has been sent to Chief
United States District Judge Brian Miller. Any party may
serve and file written objections to this recommendation.
Objections should be specific and should include the factual
or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a
factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the
evidence that supports your objection. An original and one
copy of your objections must be received in the office of the
United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen
days from the date of the findings and recommendations. The
copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file
timely objections may result in a waiver of the right to
appeal questions of fact.
are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit
new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a new
hearing for this purpose before either the Chief District
Judge or Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file
your written objections, include the following:
1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is
2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if
such a hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing
before the Magistrate Judge.
3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at
the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy,
or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial
evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.
this submission, the Chief District Judge will determine the
necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your
objections and “Statement of Necessity” to:
Clerk, United States District Court Eastern District of
Arkansas 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 Little Rock, AR
the Court is Ronald Lasley's Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus (Doc. No. 1) seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241. Petitioner is an inmate at the Bureau of Prisons
(BOP) Forrest City Federal Prison Camp and seeks the Court to
direct prison officials to grant him twelve-month placement
in a residential reentry center (RRC). For the following
reasons, I recommend the Petition be dismissed and the
requested relief be denied.
Lasley is serving a sentence of 151 months commencing March
23, 2009, and has a projected release date of October 9,
2018. (Doc. No. 3 at 2.) In accordance with the Second Chance
Act, the BOP recommended a residential re-entry center
placement of 151 to 180 days. Id. Mr. Lasley's
placement date was scheduled for April 11, 2018. (Doc. No. 1
at 25.) Mr. Lasley says prison officials violated 18 U.S.C.
§ 3624(c) by not considering a twelve-month placement in
a RRC. (Doc. No. 1 at 1-2.) He says, “. . . Petitioner
was expressly informed that unless he had unusual or
extra-ordinary circumstances, Petitioner was limited to a cap
of 150-180 days of half-way house placement and would not be
considered for the full 12 months half-way house placement as
allowed by the Second Chance Act, as set forth in 18 USC
§ 3624(c).” (Id.) Additionally, Mr.
Lasley alleges the BOP violated 42 U.S.C. § 17541 (now
34 U.S.C. § 60451) by not considering his re-entry and
skills development programs in its recommendation.