Perkins v. Kallis
- Susan Nelson
- 0:20-cv-01361
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Perkins v. Kallis, Judge Nelson denied Perkins’s release motion without prejudice because home-confinement decisions belong to the Bureau of Prisons and compassionate-release motions belong in sentencing court.
Victor B. Perkins’s request for release was denied without prejudice. The order also recognized that the Bureau of Prisons has authority over CARES Act home-confinement eligibility and that a compassionate-release motion must be filed in the sentencing court.
What happened
In Perkins v. Kallis, Victor B. Perkins, representing himself, asked the court for release from FMC-Rochester to home confinement under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act.
The court said the Bureau of Prisons—not the court—has authority to decide eligibility for home confinement under that law. The court also said that a compassionate-release request under federal law must be filed in the court that sentenced the person, and this motion was filed elsewhere.
The court denied Perkins’s motion without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar a later filing. Judge Susan Richard Nelson signed the order.
The detailed version
- Perkins v. Kallis · No. 0:20-cv-01361
- Susan Nelson
- July 4, 2020
Background
Victor B. Perkins, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a motion seeking release from FMC-Rochester. He requested release to home confinement and argued that he was eligible under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, commonly called the CARES Act.
Home-confinement request
The court held that the Bureau of Prisons has exclusive authority under the CARES Act to determine whether an inmate is eligible for home confinement. Because the court lacked authority to consider Perkins’s request for home confinement under that law, it denied the motion to that extent.
Compassionate-release request
The court also considered whether Perkins’s motion could be treated as a request for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). It explained that such motions must be addressed to the sentencing court. Because Perkins had not filed this motion in the sentencing court, the court denied the motion without prejudice.
Disposition
The court ordered that Perkins’s motion for release be denied without prejudice. The order did not decide whether Perkins qualified for home confinement or compassionate release on the merits. Judge Susan Richard Nelson signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.