Opinion ID: 2798260
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Drug Treatment Program

Text: Mr. McAllister also complains that the district court should have recommended placement in a drug-abuse treatment program. But no reasonable jurist could credit this claim. Courts do not determine whether an inmate can participate in a drugabuse program. See Tapia v. United States, __ U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 2382, 2390-91 (2011) (stating that the Bureau of Prisons has plenary control over placement and treatment programs for prisoners). That decision is made by the Bureau of Prisons. Id. Judges can make recommendations; 5 and, for the sake of argument, we can assume that the district court should have made this recommendation for Mr. McAllister. Even with this assumption, however, the claim would fail. This claim would require proof of a statutory error resulting in a complete miscarriage of justice or an inconsistency with the 5 Tapia, 131 S. Ct. at 2390-91. 10 rudimentary requirements of fair procedure. United States v. Talk, 158 F.3d 1064, 1069 (10th Cir. 1998), abrogated on other grounds as recognized in United States v. Harms, 371 F.3d 1208, 1210 (10th Cir. 2004). No reasonable jurist could regard the absence of a recommendation for drug treatment as a complete miscarriage of justice or an inconsistency with the rudimentary requirements of fair procedure. C. Reassignment to a New Judge Finally, Mr. McAllister argues that once the sentencing judge was “tainted” by the government’s improper arguments, the case should have been reassigned to a new judge. For this argument, Mr. McAllister relies on United States v. Heredia, 768 F.3d 1220, 1236 (9th Cir. 2014). This argument applies only if the government breached the plea agreement, 6 and we have concluded above that no reasonable jurist could find breach of the plea agreement. As a result, we decline to issue a certificate of appealability on the issue involving reassignment to another judge. 6 Heredia, 768 F.3d at 1236. 11 V. Summary No reasonable jurist could credit any of Mr. McAllister’s proposed appellate arguments. As a result, we decline to issue a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Entered for the Court Robert E. Bacharach