U.S. v. THOMPSON, 06-cr-00496-LTB. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Colorado
Number: infdco20120127g78
Visitors: 19
Filed: Jan. 25, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 25, 2012
Summary: ORDER LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Judge. This case is before me upon the Defendant's "Motion to Clarify and Expand the Record" (Doc 59). In it, Defendant contends that the Federal Bureau of Prisons has failed to correctly credit him with 723 days of pretrial confinement. The Government has responded to the Motion. This Court has no authority to determine and award credit for presentence confinement. United States v. Wilson , 503 U.S. 329 (1992); United States v. Jenkins , 38 F.3d 1143 , 1144 (10 t
Summary: ORDER LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Judge. This case is before me upon the Defendant's "Motion to Clarify and Expand the Record" (Doc 59). In it, Defendant contends that the Federal Bureau of Prisons has failed to correctly credit him with 723 days of pretrial confinement. The Government has responded to the Motion. This Court has no authority to determine and award credit for presentence confinement. United States v. Wilson , 503 U.S. 329 (1992); United States v. Jenkins , 38 F.3d 1143 , 1144 (10 th..
More
ORDER
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Judge.
This case is before me upon the Defendant's "Motion to Clarify and Expand the Record" (Doc 59). In it, Defendant contends that the Federal Bureau of Prisons has failed to correctly credit him with 723 days of pretrial confinement. The Government has responded to the Motion.
This Court has no authority to determine and award credit for presentence confinement. United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329 (1992); United States v. Jenkins, 38 F.3d 1143, 1144 (10th Cir. 1994). Lacking such authority, no authority to "clarify" the record on this issue.
Rather, Defendant's remedy, if any, must be pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Accordingly
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's motion is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
