IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

OWEN WEICHEL, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

UNITES STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL PRISON CAMP AT 

SHERIDAN, et al., 

Respondents. 

Owen A. Weichel, 46170-424 

FCI-Sheridan 

PO Box 5000 

Sheridan, OR 97378 

Petitioner, Pro Se 

Billy J. Williams 

United States Attorney 

Case No. 3:16-cv-00255-MO 

OPINION AND ORDER 

Natalie K. Wight, Assistant United States Attorney 

1000 SW Third Avenue, Suite 600 

Portland, OR 97204-2902 

Attorneys for Respondents 

1 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:16-cv-00255-MO Document 19 Filed 07/28/16 Page 1 of 6
MOSMAN, District Judge. 

Petitioner brings this habeas corpus case pursuant to 28 

U.S. C. § 2241 challenging a decision by the Bureau of Prisons 

("BOP") to place him in a Residential Reentry Center ("RRC") for 

only six months. Because petitioner received the consideration 

to which he was entitled, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

(#1) is denied. 

BACKGROUND 

On January 14, 2015, petitioner was convicted of bank fraud 

and filing a false tax return and sentenced to 38 months in 

prison. As petitioner began to approach the end of his 

sentence, BOP officials designated him for placement in a RRC 

six months prior to the expiration of his sentence. Petitioner 

contends that the BOP was required to consider him for placement 

in a RRC for a period of up to 12 months prior to the expiration 

of his sentence, but never did so. He asks the court to 

conclude that he was not given proper RRC consideration, and to 

fashion any relief it deems appropriate. 

Respondents ask the court to deny relief on the Petition 

because: (1) petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative 

remedies; ( 2) the court lacks jurisdiction to provide relief in 

a habeas corpus case where petitioner's success in this action 

would not result in a speedier release from his custody; and 

2 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:16-cv-00255-MO Document 19 Filed 07/28/16 Page 2 of 6
(3) the BOP gave petitioner the consideration he was due. 

Because respondents correctly assert that petitioner received 

the consideration he was due, the court need not address their 

first two arguments. 

DISCUSSION 

Pursuant to the Second Chance Act of 2007, an inmate 

nearing the end of his sentence must be considered for placement 

in a RRC in an attempt to avoid recidivism: 

The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall, 

to the extent practicable, ensure that a 

prisoner serving a term of imprisonment 

spends a portion of the final months of that 

term (not to exceed 12 months), under 

conditions that will afford that prisoner a 

reasonable opportunity to adjust to and 

prepare for the reentry of that prisoner 

into the community. Such conditions may 

include a [RRC]. 

18 U. S.C. 3624 (c) (1). 

When designating the place of imprisonment for an inmate, 

18 U.S.C. § 3621 provides five factors for the BOP to consider: 

( 1) resources of the facility contemplated; ( 2) the nature and 

circumstances of the offense; ( 3) the history and 

characteristics of the prisoner; ( 4) any relevant statement by 

the sentencing court; and ( 5) any pertinent policy statement 

issued by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) (1)-(5). 

3 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:16-cv-00255-MO Document 19 Filed 07/28/16 Page 3 of 6
Shannon Miesner is the Case Manager responsible for 

assessing petitioner for prelease custodial placement within an 

RRC. Declaration of Shannon Miesner, p. 1. She states that 

she individually assesses each inmate using the statutory 

criteria of 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) (1)-(5) before rendering a 

decision. Id at 2. According to Miesner, "[i]n the experience 

of the BOP, six months of RRC prerelease placement often 

satisfactorily accommodates inmates' transitional needs." Id at 

3. She directs the court to an April 14, 2008 Memorandum from 

the General Counsel and Assistant Director of the Correctional 

Programs Di vision issued in the wake of the Second Chance Act. 

The Memorandum was intended to provide guidance to BOP staff as 

to RRC placement and provides, in part, as follows: 

Regional Director Approval Required for PreRelease RRC Placement Beyond Six Months 

While the [Second Chance] Act makes inmates 

eligible for a maximum of 12 months prerelease RRC placements, Bureau experience 

reflects inmates' pre-release RRC needs can 

usually be accommodated by a placement of 

six months or less. Should staff determine 

an inmate's pre-release RRC placement may 

require greater than six months, the Warden 

must obtain the Regional Director's written 

concurrence before submitting the placement 

to the Community Corrections Manager. 

Miesner Declaration, Att. 1, p. 4. 

A review of the record reveals that following a program 

review on April 6, 2016, Miesner completed her Inmate Skills 

4 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:16-cv-00255-MO Document 19 Filed 07/28/16 Page 4 of 6
Development Plan for petitioner on April 14, 2016. She 

proceeded with a program review where she needed input from the 

u. s. Probation Off ice regarding its position on whether 

petitioner could relocate from his sentencing district in 

Illinois to his district of residence in California. Once this 

was done, Miesner recommended petitioner be placed in an RRC for 

148 days, but later changed the recommendation to 180 days based 

upon petitioner's participation in the BOP' s Residential Drug 

Abuse Program. Miesner Declaration, p. 4. She based her 

recommendation on her experience as a case manager after 

evaluating the five factors of§ 362l(b). Id at 5. 

According to petitioner, 42 U.S.C. § 17541 requires the BOP 

to consider him for a 12-month reentry housing placement. He 

contends that Miesner ignored this statute and never submitted 

his case for review by the Regional Director to ascertain 

whether was an acceptable candidate for the 12-month reentry 

program, and instead simply scheduled him for a 6-month reentry 

assignment. 

Forty-two U.S.C. § 17541(a) provides that the Director of 

the BOP shall establish a federal prisoner reentry initiative, 

subject to the availability of appropriations. Among the 

programs to be established are "[i]ncentives for a prisoner who 

participates in reentry and skills development programs which 

5 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:16-cv-00255-MO Document 19 Filed 07/28/16 Page 5 of 6
may, at the Discretion of the Director, include-(A) the maximum 

allowable period in a community confinement facility. II 42 

U.S.C. 17541(a) (2) (A) (emphasis added). Nothing in this statute 

requires the BOP to submit petitioner's case to the Regional 

Director for approval for a 12-month RRC placement. Referral to 

the Regional Director for RRC placements in excess of six months 

is reserved for "unusual or extraordinary circumstances." 

Miesner Declaration, Att. 2, p. 3. Based upon her experience, 

Miesner did not find petitioner's case to meet this threshold. 

In this way, Miesner followed the BOP' s policy in assessing 

petitioner's case, a policy the Ninth Circuit previously found 

to be permissible. 

( 9th Cir . 2010 ) . 

Sacora v. Thomas, 628 F.3d 1059, 1066-1070 

Where petitioner received the consideration 

that was due, relief on the Petition is denied. 

CONCLUSION 

For the reasons identified above, the Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus (#2) is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this ~ day 

Judge 

6 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:16-cv-00255-MO Document 19 Filed 07/28/16 Page 6 of 6