UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Adrian Tiberiu Oprea, Plaintiff
v. Case No. 23-cv-141-SM Opinion No. 2023 DNH 075
Warden, FCI Berlin, Defendant
O R D E R
Adrian Tiberiu Oprea (“Oprea”) is a federal prisoner
currently being held at the Federal Correctional Institution in
Berlin, New Hampshire. He petitions the court pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241, saying the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) has
improperly classified him as “ineligible” to apply time credits
he has earned under the First Step Act and, therefore,
incorrectly calculated his projected release date. He seeks an
order directing the BOP to properly account for those time
credits and to amend his projected release date by one year.
The government moves to dismiss Oprea’s petition, asserting
that it fails to state any viable claims. That is true.
Nevertheless, for the reasons discussed, the government will show cause why Oprea’s motion should not be treated as a motion
for resentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1).
Discussion
There are two ways by which inmates serving federally-
imposed sentences may reduce the amount of time they must serve
in prison. Those serving a term of imprisonment greater than
one year may earn “good time” credits for “exemplary compliance
with institutional disciplinary regulations.” 18 U.S.C. §
3624(b)(1). Inmates may also earn “time credits” under the
First Step Act for the successful completion of “evidence-based
recidivism reduction programming or productive activities.” 18
U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(A). This case involves the latter.
Oprea is a citizen of Romania, currently serving a 180-
month term of imprisonment, with no term of supervision. He is
the subject of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”)
detainer that was lodged against him in April of 2022. With the
benefit of accumulated good time credits, his anticipated “Final
Statutory Release Date” is September 10, 2024. See Sentence
Monitoring Computation Data (document no. 6-3) at 1. He has no
history of disciplinary action in the past 12 months, he is a
low security inmate, he has a “minimum PATTERN recidivism risk
score,” and the BOP reports that he has not participated in any
2 known acts of violence or gang-related activity. See Response
to Request for Administrative Remedy (document no. 7-2) at 2-3.
None of that is in dispute.
In his petition, Oprea asserts that the BOP is improperly
preventing him from applying earned FSA time credits toward
early release to prerelease custody and/or supervision because
he is subject to an ICE detainer. See Petition (document no. 1)
at para. 13. While that was once the case, it is no longer
true. As discussed in several prior orders of this court, the
BOP was, for a time, precluding inmates subject to ICE detainers
from applying earned FSA time credits toward early release.
But, on February 6, 2023, the BOP amended its procedures for
implementing the First Step Act. Among other things, it removed
language from the prior policy that precluded prisoners subject
to ICE detainers from applying FSA time credits toward an early
release to prerelease custody or supervised release. See U.S.
Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, Program Statement 5410.10
CN-1, First Step Act of 2018 – Time Credits: Procedures for
Implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4) (Feb. 6, 2023). 1
1 Available at: https://www.bop.gov/PublicInfo/execute/ policysearch?todo=query&series=5000).
3 Consequently, otherwise qualified inmates who are subject
to ICE detainers (but not final orders of removal) are now
permitted to apply earned FSA time credits toward early release
to prerelease custody or supervised release. See, e.g., Bello-
Arias v. Warden, FCI Berlin, 2023 DNH 043, 2023 WL 3043271, at
*1 (D.N.H. Apr. 21, 2023); Portocarrero Montano v. Warden, FCI
Berlin, 2023 DNH 059, 2023 WL 3572791, at *1 (D.N.H. May 15,
2023). See generally 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(E)(i).
Oprea’s problem is this: he is not “otherwise qualified” to
apply earned FSA time credits toward early release to either
prerelease custody or supervised release.
I. Oprea was not Sentenced to Supervised Release.
According to Oprea, he has earned a substantial number of
FSA time credits, 365 of which should be applied toward his
early release to supervised release. That, says Oprea, would
shorten his period of incarceration and move his anticipated
release date forward by one year, to September 23, 2023. See
Petition (document no. 1) at 7. Critically, however, when Oprea
was sentenced, this court consciously declined to impose a term
of supervision. See Transcript of Sentencing Hearing (document
no. 6-7) at 5 (“Given the likelihood of deportation following
completion of the defendant’s sentence, the Court will not
4 impose a period of supervised release.”). Consequently, there
is no term of supervision to which Oprea might be released
early.
Indeed, the FSA specifically contemplates the logical
proposition that only inmates sentenced to serve a term of
supervision may apply earned FSA time credits to secure early
release to that term of supervision. See 18 U.S.C. § 3624
(g)(3) (“If the sentencing court included as a part of the
prisoner’s sentence a requirement that the prisoner be placed on
a term of supervised release after imprisonment pursuant to
section 3583, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons may transfer
the prisoner to begin any such term of supervised release at an
earlier date, not to exceed 12 months, based on the application
of time credits under section 3632.”) (emphasis supplied). See
also 28 C.F.R. § 523.44(d) (“The Bureau may apply FSA Time
Credits toward early transfer to supervised release under 18
U.S.C. 3624(g) only when an eligible inmate has . . . a term of
supervised release after imprisonment included as part of his or
her sentence as imposed by the sentencing court.”) (emphasis
supplied). See generally Saleen v. Pullen, No. 3:23-CV-147
(AWT), 2023 WL 3603423, at *1 (D. Conn. Apr. 12, 2023).
5 Given that Oprea was not sentenced to serve a term of
supervised release, it is both logically and legally impossible
for him to apply earned FSA time credits toward early release to
supervision. After filing his 2241 petition with this court, it
appears Oprea recognized that fact and specifically noted in a
“Request for Administrative Remedy” filed with the BOP that he
is “not asking for supervised release.” Instead, he now seeks
only early release to “prerelease placement in a residential
reentry center.” See Request for Administrative Remedy
(document no. 7-2) at 1.
II. Oprea is Ineligible for Early Release to Prerelease Custody.
As noted above, Oprea is a citizen of Romania and subject
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Adrian Tiberiu Oprea, Plaintiff
v. Case No. 23-cv-141-SM Opinion No. 2023 DNH 075
Warden, FCI Berlin, Defendant
O R D E R
Adrian Tiberiu Oprea (“Oprea”) is a federal prisoner
currently being held at the Federal Correctional Institution in
Berlin, New Hampshire. He petitions the court pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241, saying the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) has
improperly classified him as “ineligible” to apply time credits
he has earned under the First Step Act and, therefore,
incorrectly calculated his projected release date. He seeks an
order directing the BOP to properly account for those time
credits and to amend his projected release date by one year.
The government moves to dismiss Oprea’s petition, asserting
that it fails to state any viable claims. That is true.
Nevertheless, for the reasons discussed, the government will show cause why Oprea’s motion should not be treated as a motion
for resentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1).
Discussion
There are two ways by which inmates serving federally-
imposed sentences may reduce the amount of time they must serve
in prison. Those serving a term of imprisonment greater than
one year may earn “good time” credits for “exemplary compliance
with institutional disciplinary regulations.” 18 U.S.C. §
3624(b)(1). Inmates may also earn “time credits” under the
First Step Act for the successful completion of “evidence-based
recidivism reduction programming or productive activities.” 18
U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(A). This case involves the latter.
Oprea is a citizen of Romania, currently serving a 180-
month term of imprisonment, with no term of supervision. He is
the subject of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”)
detainer that was lodged against him in April of 2022. With the
benefit of accumulated good time credits, his anticipated “Final
Statutory Release Date” is September 10, 2024. See Sentence
Monitoring Computation Data (document no. 6-3) at 1. He has no
history of disciplinary action in the past 12 months, he is a
low security inmate, he has a “minimum PATTERN recidivism risk
score,” and the BOP reports that he has not participated in any
2 known acts of violence or gang-related activity. See Response
to Request for Administrative Remedy (document no. 7-2) at 2-3.
None of that is in dispute.
In his petition, Oprea asserts that the BOP is improperly
preventing him from applying earned FSA time credits toward
early release to prerelease custody and/or supervision because
he is subject to an ICE detainer. See Petition (document no. 1)
at para. 13. While that was once the case, it is no longer
true. As discussed in several prior orders of this court, the
BOP was, for a time, precluding inmates subject to ICE detainers
from applying earned FSA time credits toward early release.
But, on February 6, 2023, the BOP amended its procedures for
implementing the First Step Act. Among other things, it removed
language from the prior policy that precluded prisoners subject
to ICE detainers from applying FSA time credits toward an early
release to prerelease custody or supervised release. See U.S.
Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, Program Statement 5410.10
CN-1, First Step Act of 2018 – Time Credits: Procedures for
Implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4) (Feb. 6, 2023). 1
1 Available at: https://www.bop.gov/PublicInfo/execute/ policysearch?todo=query&series=5000).
3 Consequently, otherwise qualified inmates who are subject
to ICE detainers (but not final orders of removal) are now
permitted to apply earned FSA time credits toward early release
to prerelease custody or supervised release. See, e.g., Bello-
Arias v. Warden, FCI Berlin, 2023 DNH 043, 2023 WL 3043271, at
*1 (D.N.H. Apr. 21, 2023); Portocarrero Montano v. Warden, FCI
Berlin, 2023 DNH 059, 2023 WL 3572791, at *1 (D.N.H. May 15,
2023). See generally 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(E)(i).
Oprea’s problem is this: he is not “otherwise qualified” to
apply earned FSA time credits toward early release to either
prerelease custody or supervised release.
I. Oprea was not Sentenced to Supervised Release.
According to Oprea, he has earned a substantial number of
FSA time credits, 365 of which should be applied toward his
early release to supervised release. That, says Oprea, would
shorten his period of incarceration and move his anticipated
release date forward by one year, to September 23, 2023. See
Petition (document no. 1) at 7. Critically, however, when Oprea
was sentenced, this court consciously declined to impose a term
of supervision. See Transcript of Sentencing Hearing (document
no. 6-7) at 5 (“Given the likelihood of deportation following
completion of the defendant’s sentence, the Court will not
4 impose a period of supervised release.”). Consequently, there
is no term of supervision to which Oprea might be released
early.
Indeed, the FSA specifically contemplates the logical
proposition that only inmates sentenced to serve a term of
supervision may apply earned FSA time credits to secure early
release to that term of supervision. See 18 U.S.C. § 3624
(g)(3) (“If the sentencing court included as a part of the
prisoner’s sentence a requirement that the prisoner be placed on
a term of supervised release after imprisonment pursuant to
section 3583, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons may transfer
the prisoner to begin any such term of supervised release at an
earlier date, not to exceed 12 months, based on the application
of time credits under section 3632.”) (emphasis supplied). See
also 28 C.F.R. § 523.44(d) (“The Bureau may apply FSA Time
Credits toward early transfer to supervised release under 18
U.S.C. 3624(g) only when an eligible inmate has . . . a term of
supervised release after imprisonment included as part of his or
her sentence as imposed by the sentencing court.”) (emphasis
supplied). See generally Saleen v. Pullen, No. 3:23-CV-147
(AWT), 2023 WL 3603423, at *1 (D. Conn. Apr. 12, 2023).
5 Given that Oprea was not sentenced to serve a term of
supervised release, it is both logically and legally impossible
for him to apply earned FSA time credits toward early release to
supervision. After filing his 2241 petition with this court, it
appears Oprea recognized that fact and specifically noted in a
“Request for Administrative Remedy” filed with the BOP that he
is “not asking for supervised release.” Instead, he now seeks
only early release to “prerelease placement in a residential
reentry center.” See Request for Administrative Remedy
(document no. 7-2) at 1.
II. Oprea is Ineligible for Early Release to Prerelease Custody.
As noted above, Oprea is a citizen of Romania and subject
to an ICE detainer. Consequently, pursuant to BOP Program
Statement 7310.04, he is not eligible for early release to a
halfway house or Residential Reentry Center (RRC) or, as such
facilities were formerly known, a Community Corrections Center
(CCC). See BOP Program Statement 7310.04, Community Corrections
Center Utilization and Transfer Procedure, (document no. 6-5),
Section 10(f), pages 10-11 (“Inmates in the following categories
shall not ordinarily participate in CCC [Community Corrections
Center] programs: . . . (f) Inmates with unresolved pending
charges, or detainers, which will likely lead to arrest,
6 conviction, or confinement.”) (emphasis supplied). 2 See also
Moody v. Gubbiotti, No. CV 21-12004 (RMB), 2022 WL 4976308, at
*7, n.6 (D.N.J. Oct. 3, 2022) (noting that although “no
statutory provision or BOP regulation precludes application of
[time credits] toward early supervised release of prisoners who
have state detainers lodged against them,” the presence of that
detainer means the petitioner is “not eligible for early release
to a residential reentry center or home confinement pursuant to
BOP Program Statement 7310.04.”) (emphasis supplied); Zavalunov
v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 3:19-CV-453, 2020 WL 2036722, at
*11 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 28, 2020) (“As stated, pursuant to BOP
policy, inmates with a detainer cannot participate in the
community treatment program and thus cannot be eligible for
early release.”). Oprea does not challenge that BOP policy.
In summary, then, the presence of an ICE detainer against
Oprea is no longer an obstacle to his ability to earn time
credits under the First Step Act. That detainer does, however,
preclude him from automatically applying those time credits
2 By using the phrase “shall not ordinarily participate in CCC programs,” this provision precludes Oprea from automatically applying earned FSA time credits toward early release to prerelease custody. But, at the same time, it might permit him to petition the Warden of FCI Berlin to exercise his discretion to release Oprea early to ICE custody pursuant to his detainer. See generally 18 U.S.C. § 3624(g)(1)(D)(i)(II).
7 toward early release to prerelease custody. And, because Oprea
was not sentenced to serve a period of supervised release, he
cannot apply earned FSA time credits toward early release to
supervision.
Of course, Oprea is not without recourse. It is possible
that this court could invoke the “extraordinary and compelling”
circumstances provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1) and resentence
Oprea to add a period of supervised release. Doing so might
make him eligible for early release from BOP custody into the
custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. See, e.g.,
United States v. Nunez-Hernandez, No. CR 14-20(8) (MJD), 2023 WL
3166466, at *1 (D. Minn. Apr. 27, 2023) (granting petitioner’s
request for resentencing and imposing one month of supervised
release so petitioner might obtain early release from BOP
custody into the custody of ICE, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
3624(g)(3)). See generally 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i)
(authorizing the sentencing court to modify an imposed term of
imprisonment upon, among other things, a finding that it is
warranted by “extraordinary and compelling reasons”).
It would seem, however, that few courts have invoked such
authority to resolve issues presented by cases like Oprea’s –
that is, low recidivism-risk prisoners who have accumulated
8 substantial time credits under the First Step Act but who are
unable to apply them due to the absence of a supervised release
component of their sentence). Rather than acting sua sponte,
the court deems it best to first solicit the government’s views
on the matter.
Accordingly, on or before July 21, 2023, the government may
file a legal memorandum addressing the questions presented –
that is, whether the court should treat Oprea’s petition as one
for resentencing and whether the court should resentence him to
serve an additional – albeit brief – period of supervised
release so he might benefit from accumulated FSA time credits
and secure an early release from BOP custody and into the
custody of ICE.
Conclusion
Oprea’s petition, as presented, fails to describe any
viable claims. But, if the court were to treat that petition as
one for resentencing, and then resentence Oprea to serve a brief
period of supervised release he might (at least potentially) be
released early to the custody of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement for deportation proceedings. The court will await
the government’s views before proceeding any further.
9 SO ORDERED.
____________________________ Steven J. McAuliffe United States District Judge
June 20, 2023
cc: Adrian Tiberiu Oprea, pro se Terry L. Ollila, Esq.