Poole v. Cox

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DONALD WAYNE POOLE,
Petitioner,
vs.
J.W. COX, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
WARDEN OF YANKTON FEDERAL
PRISON CAMP;
Respondent.
4:21-CV-04012-KES
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Pending before the court is a pro se habeas petition pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241 filed by petitioner Donald Wayne Poole, an inmate at the
Yankton Federal Prison Camp in Yankton, South Dakota. See Docket No. 1. In
his petition, Mr. Poole admits he has not yet exhausted his administrative
remedies provided by the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”). Id. A report and
recommendation remains pending before the district court which recommends
that Mr. Poole’s petition be held in abeyance for a period of 120 days so that he
can exhaust his administrative remedies. See Docket No. 11, filed March 18,
2021. The district court has not yet decided whether to adopt that
recommendation.
Mr. Poole now files an emergency motion to be released pending the
respondent’s response to his petition. See Docket No. 12. Courts do have
some discretion to grant bail to a habeas petitioner pending a decision on the
merits, but the petitioner must show a substantial claim of law based on the
facts and some circumstance making the request for bail exceptional and
Case 4:21-cv-04012-KES Document 13 Filed 04/07/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>

2
deserving of special treatment in the interests of justice. See, e.g. Dotson v.
Clark, 900 F.2d 77, 79 (6th Cir. 1990). Cf. Martin v. Solem, 801 F.2d 324, 329
(8th Cir. 1986) (holding court has inherent power to grant bail to a state
prisoner pending a decision on the merits of his habeas petitioner if he shows a
substantial federal constitutional claim that presents a clear case on the law
and a clear, readily apparent, case on the facts as well as the existence of some
circumstance which makes his request for bail exceptional in the interests of
justice.) Prisoners are rarely granted bail under this discretionary power of the
court. Martin, 801 F.2d at 329.
Mr. Poole has not shown either of these factors. He cites to the increased
risk of Covid infection among inmates, but if true, this is a circumstance
attendant to every federal prisoner. Mr. Poole’s circumstances are not
exceptional and deserving of special treatment as compared to all other federal
prisoners. Also, respondent has yet to address the merits of Mr. Poole’s
petition, so it is unknown whether he has presented a substantial claim of law
based on the facts.
Based on the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that Mr. Poole’s emergency motion for release (Docket No. 12)
is denied.
DATED April 7, 2021.
BY THE COURT:
VERONICA L. DUFFY
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:21-cv-04012-KES Document 13 Filed 04/07/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>