U.S. v. RAMOS, CR 114-096. (2017)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20170519a17
Visitors: 5
Filed: May 18, 2017
Latest Update: May 18, 2017
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , Chief District Judge . In the captioned criminal matter, Defendant Jose Guillermo Ramos has filed a "Motion to Award Credit for Time Served in Official Custody" in which he seeks a certain period of time presumably served in federal custody to be credited against his federal sentence. Matters of credit for time served and other length of sentence determinations are better directed to the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"), not this Court. Moreover, a judicial challenge to the
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , Chief District Judge . In the captioned criminal matter, Defendant Jose Guillermo Ramos has filed a "Motion to Award Credit for Time Served in Official Custody" in which he seeks a certain period of time presumably served in federal custody to be credited against his federal sentence. Matters of credit for time served and other length of sentence determinations are better directed to the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"), not this Court. Moreover, a judicial challenge to the ..
More
ORDER
J. RANDAL HALL, Chief District Judge.
In the captioned criminal matter, Defendant Jose Guillermo Ramos has filed a "Motion to Award Credit for Time Served in Official Custody" in which he seeks a certain period of time presumably served in federal custody to be credited against his federal sentence.
Matters of credit for time served and other length of sentence determinations are better directed to the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"), not this Court. Moreover, a judicial challenge to the BOP's decision regarding the execution of a federal sentence must be brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district of confinement rather than in;the sentencing court. Fernandez v. United States, 941 F.2d 1488, 1495 (11th Cir. 1991); see also United States v. Nyhuis, 211 F.3d 1340, 1345 (11th Cir. 2000) ("A claim for credit for time served is brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 after the exhaustion of administrative remedies."). Accordingly, once Defendant exhausts his administrative remedies with the BOP, he must bring his § 2241 challenge in the Southern District of Mississippi, which has territorial jurisdiction over the facility in which Defendant is presently incarcerated. This Court simply does not have jurisdiction to consider the matter. See Rumsfield v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 442-43 (2004).
Upon the foregoing, Defendant's motion to award credit for time served (doc. 22) is DENIED.
ORDER ENTERED.
Source: Leagle
