USA v. Alazzam et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MAHDI Al BAWI,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
AND ORDER
Case No. 2:21-CR-501-DAK
Judge Dale A. Kimball
This matter is before the court on Defendant’s Motion Requesting Recommendation for
RDAP and Motion to Transfer [ECF No. 619]. After being found guilty at trial, this court
sentenced Defendant to 72 months incarceration on May 8, 2025. Under federal law, the court
loses jurisdiction of a case at sentencing. After a defendant is sentenced, jurisdiction is turned
over to the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”). BOP determines a defendant's place of confinement.
See 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b). Even at sentencing, a judge is only able to make recommendations to
BOP. Defendant asks this court to make post-sentencing recommendations to BOP regarding his
participation in RDAP and his transfer to a facility with an RDAP program.
While the United States agrees that this court can make a recommendation to BOP at any
time, it points out that BOP is now in the best position to determine whether Defendant has a
treatable condition that can be addressed through available programming. Under governing
statutes, BOP “shall make available appropriate substance abuse treatment for each prisoner the
Bureau determines has a treatable condition of substance addiction or abuse.” 18 U.S.C. §
3621(b). Moreover, this court’s recommendations will have “no binding effect on the authority
of the Bureau . . . to determine or change the place of imprisonment of that person.” Id.
Case 2:21-cr-00501-DAK Document 637 Filed 08/26/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 2

2
The court agrees with the United States that the court cannot verify the statements in
Defendant’s motion. The BOP can assess Defendant’s situation and make the determination the
statute directs the BOP to make as to each defendant. Defendant should direct his requests to
participate in RDAP and to be transferred to an RDAP facility to BOP. If BOP wants to ask this
court for a recommendation, the court will provide one. However, the court recognizes that it is
no longer in the best position to make recommendations on these matters.
Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion Requesting Recommendation for RDAP and Motion to
Transfer [ECF No. 619] is DENIED.
Dated this 26th day of August 2026.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
DALE A. KIMBALL
United States District Judge
Case 2:21-cr-00501-DAK Document 637 Filed 08/26/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 2