Decision here.
I don't normally do statutory interpretation cases involving federal law, but I couldn't pass this one up.
Ko was serving out the final chapters of a prison sentence at home with an ankle monitor. He was allowed to leave each morning to go to work, but had to be home by 7 pm. One day, he did not come home. He was arrested in another city and charged with escape.
The magistrate dismissed the indictment, ruling that because he was being allowed to serve his sentence at home with an ankle monitor, he wasn't really in custody of the BOP. The prosecution appealed, arguing that he was in BOP custody because he hadn't finished his sentence yet, and the fact that the BOP was allowing him to serve his sentence in his own home (subject to their restrictions) didn't change anything. The Tenth Circuit agreed that prisoners in custody are in fact in custody. The dismissal of the indictment was reversed.
No comments:
Post a Comment