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.

Lasley v. Beasley

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division

June 4, 2018

RONALD LASLEY Reg #11601-031 PETITIONER
v.
GENE BEASLEY, Warden, Forrest City Federal Prison Camp RESPONDENT

          PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          JOE J. VOLPE, STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         INSTRUCTIONS

         The 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.

         If you 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 inadequate.
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.

         From 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 72201-3325

         DISPOSITION

         Before 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.

         I. BACKGROUND

         Mr. 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. Id.

         II. ...


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.