Opinion
611:CR-401-RBD-DAB
06-06-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. FREDERICK MERVIN BARDELL, Defendant.
ORAL DEPOSITION OF KODI NOONKESTER MAY 2, 2022 VOLUME 1
ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION of KODI NOONKESTER, produced as a witness at the instance of The Bureau of Prisons, and duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on the 2nd of May, 2022, from 4:47 p.m. to 5:40 a.m., before Kathy E. Weldon, CSR in and for the State of Texas, reported by machine shorthand, at the offices of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 3600, in the City of Dallas, County of Dallas, State of Texas, pursuant to Notice and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
APPEARANES
SPECIAL MASTER
Ms. Somadina Nwokolo
Mr. A. Lee Bentley
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, LLP
100 North Tampa Street
Suite 2200
Tampa, Florida 33602
813.559.5500 snwokolo@bradley.com
lbentley@bradley.com
FOR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Ms. Julie Posteraro
Mr. Jason Sickler
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
400 W. Washington Street
Suite 3100
Orlando, Florida 32801
407.648.7590 407.658.7643(fax)
julie.posteraro@usdoj-gov
Jsickler@BOP .gov
FOR WARDEN KRISI ZOOK
Mr. Glenn Green
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
CIVIL DIVISION, TORTS BRANCH
P.O. Box 7146
Ben Franklin Station Washing, DC 20044-7146
202.514.2000
glenn.greeneusdoj.gov
INDEX
| WITNESS | PAGE |
| KODI NOONKESTER | |
| EXAMINATION BY MS. NWOKOLO | 4 |
| CORRECTIONS MADE BY WITNESS | 37 |
| SIGNATURE BY WITNESS | 38 |
| REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION | 39 |
| EXHIBITS | IDENTIFIED |
| 10 - | Email dated February 8, 2021 | 15 |
| from Kodi Noonkester to Jason Burnham | ||
| PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS | IDENTIFIED | |
| 6 - | Order | 15 |
PROCEEDINGS
(All parties present have hereby waived the necessity of the reading of the statements by the deposition officer as required by Rule 30(b)(5).)
KODI NOONKESTER, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
EXAMINATION
BY MS. NWOKOLO:
Q. Okay. Good afternoon.
A. Good afternoon.
Q. Thank you for being here. I think I introduced myself before, but I'm Soma Nwokolo. I work at Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, and I am counsel assisting the special master, Lee Bentley, in this investigation. So this investigation is -- it's ordered by a federal judge into the circumstances surrounding the release of inmate Frederick Mervin Bardell, which occurred in February of 2021.
Just for the record, also in the room is Julie Posteraro who is representing the United States. We also have Jason
MS. MILLER: Sickler.
Q. (By Ms. Nwokolo) -- Sickler, who is representing the Bureau of Prisons, and on the phone
we have on Glenn Greene, who representing the warden in her personal capacity.
MS. NWOKOLO: Can we go off the record for one second?
(Break from 4:48 p.m. to 4:49 p.m.) Q. (By Ms. Nwokolo) Have you ever been deposed before?
A. No.
Q. I'll just go over some quick grounds rules.
This is being recorded -- or transcribed, and there'll be a transcript of our conversation. I'm going to ask you a series of questions. I'm just going to ask that you answer verbally, rather than nodding or shaking your head, because otherwise that can't be picked up in the transcription.
If you need to take a break, just feel free. If you feel any of my questions call for a response that is protected by attorney-client privilege, something that -- some advice that you got from legal counsel, please let me know. I'm not trying to elicit privileged communications.
If any of the attorneys have an objection, unless they -- unless it is an instruction that you not answer, you can go ahead and answer.
A. Okay.
Q. And we can go ahead and get started.
Okay. Can you please tell me your current position and how long you've been in that position?
A. I'm a classification computation specialist. I have been in this position for, gosh, four or five years. I don't know exactly.
Q. And where do you work?
A. I work at the DSCC in Grand Prairie for the Federal Bureau of Prisons Designation Center as a computation center.
Q. And is the DSCC part of the Bureau of Prisons?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Did you work for the Bureau of Prisons before you were employed in your current position?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. In what role?
A. I started in 2001 as a unit secretary. I then went into ISM, Inmate Systems management. I then went into the facilities department, and then I came to the DSCC as a classification computation technician, and then promoted to classification computation specialist.
Q. So is it accurate that you've worked for
the Bureau of Prisons for just over 20 years?
A. Yes.
Q. And what facility were you when you worked as the unit secretary in ISM in the facilities department?
A. I was in Beaumont, Texas. It's a complex, so they have a camp below a medium and a penitentiary, and I worked at all of them at one time or another.
Q. Okay. If you could just give me a brief overview of what your responsibilities were in each role. So let's start with unit secretary.
A. Routing paperwork for release and transfers, filing paperwork in the main central files, accountability of the inmate central files, and employees time and attendance records, and then purchasing supplies for the office as needed, answering phones, taking messages.
Q. And just to clarify, when -- for the other positions, I'll just want to know your responsibilities as it relates to release procedures.
A. Oh, okay. All right.
When I went into ISM, we did -- wereviewed the files for the inmates before they released, prepared their detainers if they had detainers. We reviewed the paperwork, made sure that everything was there and appeared to be appropriate, I guess, you know, matching what their sentence computation was.
And then if we needed to do any routing of paperwork, you know, to the supervisors for approvals and stuff like that. It's kind of what I do now. Only now, it's on a lot higher scale. We actually compute the sentence computations and prepare designations. So when I was a facility assistant, I had nothing to do with release paperwork at all.
Q. What was your job?
A. We -- basically maintenance. So I was kind of the secretary for the maintenance department.
Q. And ISM, I believe that this -- that that is now called the correctional systems; is that correct?
A. Correct, yes.
Q. And do you know what the equivalent of your title would be now? It's called a different name?
A. I was legal instruments examiner when I was in ISM. That would probably be equivalent to like what a CCT does, which is the classification technician, which is the -- the position I had before the position I have now.
Q. Okay. Do you have anyone who reports to you in your current position?
A. Reports to me? No. I work with staff. No, I'm not in a supervisory position.
Q. Okay. Who do you report to?
A. I report to -- my ops manager is Monica Black.
Q. And you called her an operations manager?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. During an inmate release, what are the responsibilities of a classification and computation specialist?
A. Well, we compute the inmate sentences, and -well, the -- the technicians compute the sentences, and then they are reviewed by either a senior technician or by a specialist for the first audit. At that time, we sign off on those, make sure that everything's accurate, the jail credit's proper, the -- whatever law they fall under is correct, you know sentencing documents from the judge and the USPO. We're reviewing for jail credit.
And once that computation has been completed, and then it's certified for first time. And then 13 months out before the inmate is to release, we do a final release audit, and that is done by a specialist. The technicians are not allowed to do final release audits.
Q. And the audit that you referred to that technicians are allowed to do, what was that name of that?
A. That would be the -- the certification -- the first certification.
Q. Okay. And what does a final release audit entail?
A. Reviewing all of the paperwork again, making sure that nothing was missed, checking for any disciplinary, you know, if you lost any good conduct time. Just reviewing it one more time, one, you know last set of eyes going on it before you actually certify it for a final release, and then the institution knows that the inmate is good to go.
Q. Okay. How does that process differ for a compassionate release or an immediate release?
A. Well, a compassionate release is -- we do not touch the computation. We don't change the computation. He is just satisfied at the institution as a compassionate release, so we don't adjust the term, you know, or anything like that.
Q. Okay. So what -- first of all, how does the DS- -- the DSCC receive immediate release orders?
A. Are you talking about immediate release, or are you talking about a compassionate release?
An immediate release could be something, like, a time served or a sentence reduction that makes the inmate an immediate release. A compassionate release is an order where an inmate is to be released then, unless there is some circumstance that, you know, is mentioned in it, so
Q. Okay.
A. I -- I think you're asking me about a compassionate release. So we receive the orders from -- we can receive them in what we call Pacer -I'm sorry, in Capture, which comes from the U.S. Marshals. Sometimes we receive them as an email from Marshals. Sometimes we will receive them from the institution.
Maybe the inmate goes out to court, and he comes back, and they receive the order. Then they'll sent them to us via email.
Q. Is there any other way that you typically receive
A. We have
Q. -- compassionate release orders?
A. I have had lawyers call me before and say that the inmate just got out of court. He received, you know, a release order. And then we'll -- we'll have them email that to us, and then we'll verify -- everything's verified through Pacer to make sure that it is, you know, true.
Q. So if I'm understanding correctly, once DS- -- DSCC receives a compassionate release order, it verifies that order through Pacer to make sure it's a true order?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay.
A. We will verify that order in Pacer, and if for some reason it is not in there, then we can call the courts and verify that way also.
Q. Okay. Before I continue, I don't think I mentioned this before, but if we talk over one another, it makes it very hard for the -- for the reporter to transcribe that, so I'll be mindful of it, too.
A. Okay.
Q. And so how does that differ from an immediate release which you distinguished?
A. An immediate release would still have to be verified, and we would still possibly receive them all the same way.
Q. Do the responsibility -- do your -- does your role differ for an immediate release order as compared to a compassionate release order?
A. No. We would -- we would still process it the same way.
Q. And then you mentioned -- you mentioned that a compassionate release order is an order that orders -- an order that requires that an inmate be release then and there, unless there's a condition that -- that provides otherwise?
A. Correct.
Q. And so once a DSCC -- you receive a compassionate release order and you verify it through Pacer, what is -- what's the next step?
A. The next step would be to contact the institution, let them know that they have received a compassionate release for inmate, whoever, to send the verified order via email along with an email confirming, you know, something like "As we, you know, discussed earlier, inmate so-and-so has been granted a compassionate release. Please, you know, release accordingly." And we would attach the order to it so they had the signed order to know that we verified it.
Q. Okay. So when -- in your role as -- CCS is that a
A. Correct.
Q. -- is that an acronym?
Okay. I just made it up.
In your role as a CCS at DSCC, do you -do you read the orders that you validate?
A. Yes, I read the order that I validate.
Q. Okay. And when you read it and then you send it to the institution, you -- you gave me an example of language that you would put in there, but if there is a special condition like you stated before, would that typically go in the body of the email?
A. We do not have to put that in the body of the email.
Q. You said you do not have to put it in the body of the email -- body of the email. What typically do you put in the body of the email?
A. Something just to the effect of "Inmate so-and-so, please see attached verified order for inmate so-and-so, has been granted a compassionate release. Please release accordingly."
I have seen where they have given days to provide transportation, you know, added to it. I might or might not put that on the email. We are not -- I guess it's not mandatory that we do. Our job is to verify the email and send it to the institution. I'm sorry, verify the order and send it to the institution and make sure that we make contact.
You know, you wouldn't want to send an
email and somebody not open it and it get missed, so we always, you know, do a personal response, too.
Q. What do you mean by "personal response"?
A. I mean, like talking to someone in person and making sure that I include them in the email, their name, so that it doesn't just go to a group box.
Q. And when you say you can talk to someone in person, do you mean you call the institution?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Who at the institution would you typically call?
A. I would try to reach somebody in correctional systems.
Q. Do you remember this case?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Okay.
(Deposition Exhibit No. 10 was marked.)
Q. (By Ms. Nwokolo) Okay. I'm going to hand you a document what I'm -- that I'm going to mark as Exhibit 10, and then I will also be referencing Exhibit 6, which is in the pile that you have.
A. Okay.
Q. Let me know when you have reviewed No. 10.
A. Okay. I've reviewed Exhibit 10.
Q. Okay. What is Exhibit 10?
A. Exhibit 10 looks like it's an email where Jason Burnham asked me at 1:10 if I was -- if anybody was able to verify the order, and they were working on getting him released and booking him a flight. And I responded at 2:30 and said, "See attached."
Q. Okay. And this is 1:10 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. on Monday the 8th, 2021, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. And can you look at Exhibit No. 6 in the pile in front of you?
A. (Witness complies.)
Q. Is that what you would have sent as the attachment?
A. Correct. This would be the order that I would have attached.
Q. So in front of you in Exhibit No. 6, you have the district court order, the release order that is verified by Barbara L. DeLeon.
A. Correct.
Q. And who is Barbara L. DeLeon?
A. This is a CCT at the DSCC on Lema Team, which is a team that I work on.
Q. So she's a technician?
A. Correct, yes. CCT meaning technician.
Q. Okay. So in this situation, it's a little different from the process you described because it's not sent to a mailbox. It's just sent to an individual.
A. That's what it appears, yes.
Q. Okay. Was this -- was this unusual, or is this usual?
A. No. When I reviewed the file, when I was told the inmate's name and what was going to happen, I saw in his inmate file where Ms. DeLeon had sent an email at 1:30 with this order. And so when I received this email at, I guess, 2:30 basically -- because it wouldn't have taken me a minute to get into the file and -- and drop it in there and send it -- I probably pulled it up. I saw where Ms. DeLeon had -- had -had verified it and then sent them the email, and I'm guessing that I attached her email and this order to this email and sent it.
Q. Okay.
A. She had already sent the initial email and order at -- I believe it was, like, 11:30 that morning.
Q. Okay. So after you sent this email in response to Jason Burnham's email, did you follow up with a call?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Because it had already been sent?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. And so that was your way of kind of saying it's already been sent but here it is again?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. And do you know Jason Burnham?
A. I do not.
Q. Okay. And then one more thing about Exhibit 10. You'll see the subject says "immediate release." If you were sending an email to the facility, would you have titled it "immediate release" for the order you see in Exhibit 6?
A. I can't tell you if I would or I wouldn't have.
Q. Okay. The reason I ask is because I didn't -- I wasn't aware of the difference between compassionate release and immediate release. In fact, I've been using them interchangeably all day, but you were quick to let me know the difference.
So I guess my question is: Is that something that, you know, you -- you distinguish when you send to a facility?
A. Most compassionate release that I have witnessed have been immediate. Very few have I ever seen that had a stipulation to prolong it or extended it a day or so, or in this case, I believe the judge ordered something else.
So it -- where you're crossing immediate and compassionate and all that, I'm sure it happens all the time inside the institution. You know, I'm sure that they do the same thing, that
Q. Okay. So, you -- you know, you're correct that there was an additional condition in this -- in this order, and so if you don't mind flipping to Page 6 for me on Exhibit 6.
A. (Witness complies.)
Q. And so one of the conditions that -- well, actually, let's just -- let's just read one of the conditions.
So the condition at No. 5 at the bottom of Page 6
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- says, "The Federal Bureau of Prisons is directed to release Defendant Frederick Mervin Bardell immediately after the United States probation office approves a release plan."
In your opinion, would that -- would that dis- -- would that provision distinguish this order from an immediate release order as you understand it?
A. Yes. I would understand it as the inmate was to be released after the USPO provided a release plan.
Q. Okay. So going back to Jason Burnham's email, Exhibit 10, is the title of that email somewhat misleading?
A. I can't answer that.
Q. Okay.
A. I guess it would depend on who -- who reads it and how they interpret it.
Q. Okay. So you did read this order?
A. I did not read the order until it was brought to my attention that I was going to be called as a witness.
Q. Okay. And is that because Ms. DeLeon had handled it?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. Do you typically read the orders that you verify?
A. The orders that I verify I read.
Q. Okay. When you worked as -- worked in the ISM department just now, I believe known as the Correctional Systems Department, did you -- did you appreciate the distinction between a compassionate release order and an immediate release order?
A. I don't ever remember seeing a compassionate release order when I -- I don't even know if they exist then. I don't ever remember seeing one.
Q. Okay. When you receive an immediate release order -- did you ever receive any immediate release orders when you worked for ISM?
A. I don't remember, and we had -- back when I was in ISM, our supervisors reviewed all of the computations for a final release. We didn't do that. As a -- as a legal tech, we did not review for final releases. We would take that to our supervisors, and they would review them.
Q. So I'm confused. Did you work as a legal technician at IS- -- ISM department?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. But the duties were different back then.
Q. Okay. What were the duties back then?
A. From -- it's been a long time since I was a legal tech. I know that we checked on detainers. I know that we reviewed for jail credit. We entered computations. But I do not believe that we audited any computations. The supervisors were responsible for auditing all of the computations to ensure for accuracy.
Q. Okay. You -- you -- you made a -- you made a comment earlier that your job at ISM was similar to your job now, but -- but your job now is just on a higher level. Do you recall saying that?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Okay. And you also mentioned that you functioned as a legal instruments examiner at ISM; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. And what is the role -- your role -what was your role as a legal instruments examiner?
A. That's what we just discussed: Researching jail credit, doing jail credit memos if needed, sending off detainer action letters, entering the computation. And then the supervisors would review them for accuracy and let us know if something needed to be changed.
They also did all of the certifications and the release audits.
Q. So earlier you -- you used the word "legal tech." Is that -- did you use the word "legal tech;" is that correct?
A. I believe I did.
Q. Okay. And is that equivalent to a legal instruments examiner?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Okay. I would like some clarification. When you say "computations," can you explain what you mean by that?
A. A computation is what is put into Sentry after the inmate has been sentenced, and that lets the institutions know -- basically, it's -- it's to formulate a release -- a release date.
Q. And I apologize because I know I'm probably making you repeat something, but can you also explain to me what a certification is?
A. A certification is done after the computation has been entered, and that is just to verify that nothing was missed, that the sentence procedures are correct, the jail credit is correct, the term is correct, the supervision is correct. Just that we didn't miss anything.
Q. And then can you clarify for me what a release audit is again?
A. The final release audit is the -- is the second review 13 months prior to the inmate releasing, once again, to make sure that nothing was missed, that he doesn't have any disallowance that we've missed, that maybe a daily -- a day of jail credit was mi- -you know what I mean? We just want to make sure that -- that three sets of eyes have -- have looked at this now and that that inmate is good to be released.
Q. Okay. And you also made a comment that things are done differently now in the correction -correctional systems.
A. Compared to when I was a legal instruments examiner to what I do now, yes, our -- we -- our roles are a lot bigger, I mean, because we are doing the audits now.
Q. Okay. So you are not commenting on a difference that your prior role has now?
A. No.
Q. Commenting on the difference
A. Yeah.
Q. -- between your role then and your role now?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. Okay. So you -- you worked -- you have significant experience, you know, in institutions doing routing and verifying all this paperwork. In your opinion, who at an institution is ultimately responsible for making sure a condition in the order is followed?
A. I don't know -- I'm not sure if -- if I can answer that.
Q. In your opinion.
A. In my opinion? I would think that the correctional systems would review the order. I would think that the case manager coordinator would review the order, and that unit team would possibly review the order -- or the paperwork to make sure, you know, that they didn't see anything.
Q. So in your current role, verification of an order
A. I don't know what the release procedures are inside the institutions. I'm not sure what policies states, you know, who has to -- who has to review what and how it has to, you know, be passed along and signed off on. I know that there's a procedure, but I don't know what that procedure is.
Q. Okay. You mentioned in your current role for final release, technicians do not do that, only specialists can do
A. Correct.
Q. -- can do final release audits.
A. Technicians do not do final release audits.
Q. Okay. So in that role, the person that has ultimately responsibility for a final release audit is the specialist, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. So -- and it's okay if you don't have an answer, but you don't -- in your experience -- I'm just asking about the experience that you had -- was -- did you have an understanding of a role, like an individual role that had final responsibility for making sure that that release order is -- the conditions were followed?
A. I'm not sure if I understand your question.
Q. When you worked in an institution
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- did you have an understanding of whose responsibility it was to ensure that conditions in a release order were complied with?
A. When I was inside the institution, yes. We had -- we had a -- I'm sure that we had a guideline that we had to follow, but it's been a long time since I've been inside, so I don't remember what that guideline was. I don't remember who actually had to sign off on all of the paperwork before it was approved to release.
Q. Do you remember who approved it in the -- in the final instance -- who approved the paperwork to release an inmate? Because you said you don't remember who had to sign off on the paperwork before it was approved to release, but do you remember who approved it?
A. I know that the -- I know that the ISM supervisors signed off on the -- they did the final release audits and the audits. For some reason, I'm thinking that release paperwork was also routed through the case management coordinators, and unit team prepared the release paperwork.
And then it would go to R&D after it'd all been signed and approved and it was good to go. Then R&D would get a packet with all of the signatures on there that let them know that this inmate was ready to go.
That's what I remember.
Q. Okay. And you haven't worked in an institution since what year did you
A. 2012.
Q. So the process you just described is the process that was in place -- would have been the process that you replace -- I mean, at the latest 2012?
A. I was in facilities for seven years prior to that, so I was out of case management. Probably from 2005, I had nothing to do with inmate paperwork, release paperwork, any of that.
Q. Okay. Last time that you worked on release paperwork was 2005?
A. Approximately, yes.
Q. Okay. I'm not holding you to that.
A. Yeah.
Q. Okay. Can we just recap the years in your positions? It'll just help me kind of ground some of my questions.
So I think that you said you joined BOP in 2001 as the unit secretary?
A. Correct.
Q. And then what year did you go to ISM?
A. (No verbal response.)
Q. You don't remember?
A. I do not remember.
Q. That's okay.
A. Maybe around 2003, 2004. I was unit secretary for a few -- a couple of years.
Q. Okay. And you weren't ISM very long?
A. No. I was in ISM for probably -- not quite two years.
Q. And then facilities department for about seven years?
A. And then facilities department until 2012 when I went to the DSCC.
Q. Is seven years correct?
A. I would say seven years, yes.
Q. Okay. That's all. Thank you.
So once -- once as a specialist, you send a verificati- -- a verified order to the institution, do you have any more involvement in the release procedures?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Can you turn back to Exhibit 6, the order, and you can leave it on Page 6, please.
A. (Witness complies.)
Q. Okay. Can you read the -- the provision No. 2 on Page 6?
A. "Defendant Frederick Mervin Bardell's previously imposed sentence of 151 months (Doc 59) is reduced to time served."
Q. Okay. Is it true that once -- or is it your understanding that once an inmate's sentence is reduced to time served that they no longer have an active sentence?
A. Correct.
Q. And what is the -- why is that your understanding?
A. Because that's what we've been trained.
Q. Okay.
A. Time served means time served. The inmate is finished with his sentence.
Q. Would you happen to recall whether -- whether part of that training -- whether that was written
materials that you were able to learn that from?
A. I would imagine there is something that is written. And, also, when we go to verbal training, I would -- I would think that was -- this is discussed, also, but I believe there's something explaining a time served order in policy, yes.
Q. Okay. But as we sit here today, you're not sure exactly where that authority is?
A. No. I'm -- I'm sure I have it in my computer, you know, under my training tips or something like that to reference, but I -- I don't know actually where in policy it is.
Q. And when you say "saved in your computer to reference," do you mean like a personal note to yourself?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. Okay. So given your understanding that, you know, upon operation of that provision, the inmate no longer had an active sentence, does that mean that the inmate can just walk right out of the door immediately?
A. If the Provision 5 down there had not said "immediately after the United States probation office approves a release plan," I would say yes, the inmate would walk out the door that day.
Q. Okay. But the order does say on Provision 5 -- it says, "The Bureau of Prisons is directed to release Defendant Frederick Mervin Bardell, immediately after the United States probation office approves a release plan."
So how does that alter -- alter the instruction that the sentence is complete?
A. I read this as the judge wanted inmate Bardell to have a release plan submitted by the USPO before he was actually allowed to release.
Q. Okay. In your experience -- sorry.
A. That is my interpretation.
Q. Okay. In your experience, is there anything problematic or inconsistent between those two provisions, Provision 2 and Provision 5?
A. Yes. I think it's very confusing.
Q. Okay. Can you explain why?
A. Because we are taught a time served order is time served order. A compassionate release is a compassionate release, that they're to be released then. Then you get down to the very bottom and it's, like, oh, but we want the USPO to provide a -- to provide release plan.
I've never seen an order like this.
Q. Okay. You know, in your role at the facility, if you see an order like this, what would -what would you think is the appropriate procedure?
A. I would probably contact a supervisor and get some clarification.
Q. And when you were with the facilities, and particularly in your role as -- with the ICM -- I'm sorry, ISM, did you read the release orders that you processed?
A. I would -- I would say, yes, that I probably did. But I don't ever remember processing a compassionate release order back then.
Q. Okay. So one of the things that you stated -- or you agreed with me with is that if -- if Provision 5 wasn't there, Provision 2 would have operated to -- the provision -- the Provision 2 which states that the inmate's sentence had been reduced to time served, that would allow him to walk out that day, correct?
A. Provision 4 addresses also that they want the USPO to create an approved plan. So if -- if -- if 4 and 5 were not there, yes, I would say that the inmate was to walk out that day, the day that we received it, verified it, yes.
Q. Okay. But after an inmate -- after -- after an institution receives a release order, I mean, the inmate can walk out that day, but they can't walk out that minute, correct?
A. No. It takes a while to process the release paperwork.
Q. Okay. And do you know what authority requires holding the inmate until the release paperwork is processed?
A. I do not.
Q. But that's something -- it is your understanding that the Bureau of Prisons has the authority to hold an inmate even though their sentence has been reduced to time served until their paperwork is processed?
A. I wouldn't be able to answer that. I don't know what the institutions inside do.
Q. Pardon? What did you say?
A. I don't know what the instituti- -- what the insti- -- the institutions inside have to do to process the paperwork. If they couldn't get a bus ticket or they couldn't get an airplane ticket or they couldn't get the business office to provide him with money, I'm -- I don't know if it was after hours. I'm not really sure what their -- what their policy is.
Q. Okay. I mean, is it confusing -- if it's confusing that -- that a provision that reduces an inmate's sentence to time served would have conditions imposed by the Court before the inmate can actually leave, why is it not confusing that the Bureau of Prisons would have conditions after a prisoner is released is -- after a prisoner's sentence is reduced to time served before he can actually walk out of the door?
A. I don't think we have the right to hold an inmate after he's been ordered released. I don't know of a case where we've ever held an inmate -- me, personally, that an inmate has ever been held after receiving an order for time served.
Q. So what is -- after an institution receives an order that reduces sentence to time served, the institution starts their release paperwork, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. But they -- but they can't release him until DSCC verifies that it's a legitimate order, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. And they can't release him until they finish the release paperwork, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. So would you agree that the Bureau of Prisons itself has its own conditions before they will actually let an inmate walk out the door even though there's a release order that reduces that sentence to time served?
A. I believe we have a policy to follow to make sure that it's done correctly, yes.
Q. You used the terminology that BOP has a policy that it follows to make sure release is done correctly. Isn't a sentence in court the authority on a sentence?
A. Yes. I would -- I would say that, yes. But I can't interpret BOP pol- -- I can't tell you, you know, what BOP policy is, and, I mean
Q. Right. I'm not -- I'm not necessarily asking that. I just -- you know, I had a -- I had a conver- -- I had some discussions about this -- this confusion, and I asked who would know the authority, and I was told that DSCC would, so I've been waiting for this so I can ask you about it.
Here's where I'm -- here's my point, is that -- the way I read 4 and 5, I think you could also interpret that -- that the Court is trying to make sure that the release is done appropriately. 4 requires that there's an approved time of release by probation, which I understand an approved plan of release is required anyway. And 5 just requires that that approved plan of release is in place before the Bureau of Prisons releases the inmate.
So I guess my question to you is: If BOP can have policy in place to make sure a release is done correctly, doesn't it make sense a court can put conditions in place to make sure that the release is done correctly as they see it should be done?
A. Yes, I would agree with that.
Q. Okay. Ms. Noonkester, I do not have any more questions for you.
MS. POSTERARO: I'm good, I think.
THE REPORTER: The deposition is complete. Will counsel please state all stipulations with regard to custody of transcript, exhibits, and any other pertinent matters?
MS. POSTERARO: Read and sign.
(Deposition adjourned at 5:40 p.m.)