U.S. v. Wray

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. PONYA NICHELLE WRAY

Court: United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

Date published: Sep 7, 2007

CRIMINAL NO. 3:00CR184 (W.D.N.C. Sep. 7, 2007)

Opinion

CRIMINAL NO. 3:00CR184.

September 7, 2007

ORDER

LACY THORNBURG, District Judge

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant's motion to defer restitution payments until her release from prison.

The Bureau of Prisons has the authority to place a defendant in the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program based on the wording contained in the criminal judgment. United States v. Watkins , 161 F. App'x 337 (4^th Cir. 2006); Bramson v. Winn , 136 F. App'x 380 (1^st Cir. 2005). The authority and method of collecting through the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program as well as the determination of the Defendant's ability to pay has been delegated to the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) by federal regulations. 28 C.F.R. §§ 545.10-.16. Defendant is, therefore, obligated to exhaust all administrative remedies through the BOP before approaching the appropriate district court. McGhee v. Clark , 166 F.3d 884, 885-87 (7^th Cir. 1999); Aja v. Bureau of Prisons Staff , 202 F.3d 267 (table), 1999 WL 1336093 (6^th Cir. 1999); United States v. Rumney , 86 F.3d 1147 (table), 1996 WL 325485 (1^st Cir. 1996); Indelicato v. Suarez , 207 F.Supp.2d 216 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). Thereafter, a defendant may challenge such payments but only by filing the appropriate pleading in the district court of confinement, not with the sentencing court. Matheny v. Morrison , 307 F.3d 709, 712 (8^th Cir. 2002); Moore v. Olson , 368 F.3d 757, 759 (7^th Cir.), cert. denied , 543 U.S. 949 (2004). IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Defendant's motion to defer restitution payments is hereby DENIED.