Filed: Aug. 10, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3852 _ Will Reed, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern Marvin Morrison, Warden, FCI, * District of Arkansas. Forest City, Arkansas, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * _ Submitted: August 4, 2000 Filed: August 10, 2000 _ Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Will Reed, Jr., a federal inmate serving a sentence for a firearm conviction, appea
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3852 _ Will Reed, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern Marvin Morrison, Warden, FCI, * District of Arkansas. Forest City, Arkansas, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * _ Submitted: August 4, 2000 Filed: August 10, 2000 _ Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Will Reed, Jr., a federal inmate serving a sentence for a firearm conviction, appeal..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 99-3852
___________
Will Reed, Jr., *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the Eastern
Marvin Morrison, Warden, FCI, * District of Arkansas.
Forest City, Arkansas, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellee. *
___________
Submitted: August 4, 2000
Filed: August 10, 2000
___________
Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit
Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Will Reed, Jr., a federal inmate serving a sentence for a firearm conviction,
appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. In his petition,
1
The Honorable Stephen M. Reasoner, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the
Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District
of Arkansas.
he complained the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) failed to credit against his federal
sentence the time he served in Mississippi state custody for an unrelated state drug
conviction, because, although physically incarcerated by the state, he was actually in
federal custody. His argument rests on the erroneous assumption that when Mississippi
released him from prison on an appeal bond (at which point he was immediately
arrested by federal authorities for an unrelated offense), the state lost primary
jurisdiction over him.
We conclude Mississippi retained jurisdiction over him. Regardless of the state
court’s intentions when it released him on bond, neither the state prosecutor nor any
representative of the state executive branch relinquished jurisdiction. See United States
v. Dowdle, No. 99-3895,
2000 WL 868477 (8th Cir. June 30, 2000) (per curiam) (as
sovereign that first arrested convict, state had primary jurisdiction which it could elect
under doctrine of comity to relinquish to United States, but such discretionary election
is executive--not judicial--function; state judge’s notation on criminal docket indicating
state relinquished custody of convict to BOP was thus ineffective to change convict’s
status).
Accordingly, we affirm.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-