Opinion
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 2:06cr002.
January 6, 2010
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant's letter filed on November 9, 2009, which the Court construes as a motion to adjust the payments that he is required to make through the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program (IFRP). [Doc. 115].
The Bureau of Prisons has the authority to place a defendant in the IFRP based on the wording contained in the criminal judgment.See United States v. Watkins, 161 F. App'x 337 (4th Cir. 2006);Bramson v. Winn, 136 F. App'x 380 (1st Cir. 2005). Before seeking relief from any court regarding obligations under the IFRP, a defendant must exhaust all administrative remedies through the Bureau of Prisons. McGhee v. Clark, 166 F.3d 884, 885-87 (7th Cir. 1999). Once all administrative remedies have been exhausted, a defendant may challenge such payments only by filing the appropriate pleading in the district court of confinement, not the sentencing court. See Matheny v. Morrison, 307 F.3d 709, 712 (8th Cir. 2002); Moore v. Olson, 368 F.3d 757, 759 (7th Cir. 2004).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Defendant's motion to adjust the payments that he is required to make through the IFRP [Doc. 115] is DENIED.