United States of America v. Jaclyn Hilow

2020 DNH 093
CourtDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire
DecidedJune 2, 2020
Docket15-cr-170-JD
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 DNH 093 (United States of America v. Jaclyn Hilow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States of America v. Jaclyn Hilow, 2020 DNH 093 (D.N.H. 2020).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 15-cr-170-JD Opinion No. 2020 DNH 093 Jaclyn Hilow

O R D E R

Jaclyn Hilow, proceeding pro se, moved for compassionate

release from FCI Danbury under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) because of

the risk presented by the COVID-19 pandemic in combination with

her health issues. After counsel was appointed, counsel filed a

supplemental motion. The government objects.

Standard of Review

The Director of the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) may bring a

motion on behalf of a defendant to reduce the term of the

defendant’s imprisonment. § 3582(c)(1)(A). If the Director

does not file such a motion on behalf of a defendant, the

defendant may file a motion on his or her own behalf in certain

circumstances. The defendant must have “fully exhausted all

administrative rights to appeal a failure of the Bureau of

Prisons to bring a motion on the defendant’s behalf” or, thirty

days must have passed since the warden at the defendant’s

facility received the defendant’s request without a response.

Id. When a defendant has satisfied the administrative

exhaustion requirement, the court may reduce a term of

imprisonment based on a finding that “extraordinary and

compelling reasons warrant such a reduction” and “after

considering the factors provided in section 3553(a) to the

extent that they are applicable.” § 3582(c)(1)(A). The court

also considers whether the requested “reduction is consistent

with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing

Commission.” § 3582(c)(1)(A). The applicable policy statement

provides guidance on when extraordinary and compelling

circumstances may be found. U.S.S.G. 1B1.13.

Background

Hilow pleaded guilty on June 30, 2016, to a charge of

conspiracy to distribute one kilogram or more of heroin in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and § 841. She was sentenced to

ten years of imprisonment, the mandatory minimum sentence, to be

followed by five years of supervised release.1 She has now

served sixty-two months of her 120-month sentence, and her

release date is September 16, 2022.

1 The advisory guideline range for Hilow’s sentence was 135 to 168 months. The government assented to Hilow’s motion for a downward variance to the statutory minimum sentence. The court granted that motion.

2 During her incarceration, Hilow has participated in

extensive treatment programs to address her substance abuse and

mental health issues. She has also participated in and

completed educational and training programs. On October 31,

2017, she was awarded “FSL Community Member of the Month” that

recognized her “For Striving to Practice and Model Community

Values, Skills, Conscientiousness and Kindness.” She has been

discipline free during her prison term, and the government

agrees that she has done very well.

Hilow has asthma, high blood pressure, migraines, high

cholesterol, and acid reflux disease. She is also prediabetic

and borderline obese. She has an Albuterol inhaler to be used

as needed for asthma, and she takes medication for high blood

pressure. She uses ibuprophen and Excedrin as needed for

migraines and takes Zantac for acid reflux. The government had

Hilow’s medical records reviewed by Dr. Gavin Muir for purposes

of her motion for compassionate release. Dr. Muir found that

Hilow’s asthma is in the mild persistent category but did not

address Hilow’s other health issues. In addition to her

physical health issues, Hilow has been diagnosed with bipolar

disorder, anxiety, depression, and post traumatic stress

disorder.

Currently, Hilow is incarcerated at FCI Danbury. It is

undisputed that FCI Danbury has had and continues to have a

3 significant number of confirmed COVID-19 cases among inmates and

staff. See www.bop.gov/cornoavirus, last visited on May 29,

2020; Martinez-Brooks v. Easter, 2020 WL 2405350, at *27 (D.

Conn. May 12, 2020). On April 3, 2020, Attorney General William

Barr issued a memorandum for the Director of the Bureau of

Prisons with the subject: “Prioritization of Home Confinement

As Appropriate in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic.” Doc. 80-1.

In that memorandum, Attorney General Barr acknowledged a

significant number of COVID-19 cases at FCI Danbury, found that

an emergency existed, and directed the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”)

to maximize transfers from FCI Danbury to home confinement. Id.

at *2.

In her motion, Hilow describes her living conditions as an

open dormitory that looks like a warehouse with standard office

cubicles set up inside of it. Hilow lives in one of the

cubicles with three other women. The cubicles do not have

doors, and the walls are less than five feet five inches high.

Hilow states that because of the living conditions there is no

way to practice social distancing, as is recommended to avoid

COVID-19 infection.

Hilow applied to the warden at FCI Danbury, Warden D.

Easter, on April 14, 2020, for a reduction in her sentence

because of her health concerns related to COVID-19. Her request

was denied on April 24, 2020. She filed an appeal of that

4 decision on April 29, 2020, but did not receive a response. On

April 17, 2020, the BOP considered Hilow for home confinement

but declined to make that change.

On April 27, 2020, inmates at FCI Danbury filed a petition

for a writ of habeas corpus as a putative class action under 28

U.S.C. § 2241, seeking relief related to the risks presented by

COVID-19 in that facility. Martinez-Brooks v. Easter, 2020 WL

2405350, at *1-*2 (D. Conn. May 12, 2020). In that case, the

court noted in its order issued in conjunction with a temporary

restraining order, that there are significant numbers of

positive COVID-19 cases in the facility and that the facility

has experienced difficulty in coping with the spread of the

disease. Id. at *4-*9. The court found that despite the

authority granted to the BOP to place inmates on home

confinement and the direction in Attorney General Barr’s

memorandum to do so, “the implementation of this directive at

FCI Danbury has been slow and inflexible.” Id. at 22. Further,

the court found, “by failing to make meaningful use of her home

confinement authority, the Warden has failed to implement what

appears to be the sole measure capable of adequately protecting

vulnerable inmates—a measure the Attorney General directed the

BOP to implement ‘immediately’ and with ‘dispatch’.” Id. at

*23. The court denied the warden’s motion to dismiss the suit

and granted, in part, the inmates’ motion for a temporary

5 restraining order to “accelerat[e] the process for evaluating

inmates for home confinement and compassionate release, and

focus[] that process on achieving a ‘reasonable’ balance between

the risks to inmate safety and the risks to public safety.” Id.

at *32.

United States Probation Officer Scott Davidson reviewed

Hilow’s request for compassionate release and filed an initial

report. He found that Hilow’s request is based on her assertion

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Imposition of a sentence
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
Attempt and conspiracy
21 U.S.C. § 846
Power to grant writ
28 U.S.C. § 2241

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 DNH 093, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-of-america-v-jaclyn-hilow-nhd-2020.