United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Brunswick Division
ORDER AND MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND
BENJAMIN W. CHEESBRO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Anthony Vega (“Vega”), who is currently
incarcerated at FCC Forrest City Medium in Forrest City,
Arkansas, filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus while he was housed at the Federal Correctional
Institution in Jesup, Georgia. Doc. 1. Respondent filed a
Response, and Vega filed a Traverse. Docs. 7, 8. For the
reasons which follow, I RECOMMEND the Court
DENY Vega's Petition,
DIRECT the Clerk of Court to
CLOSE this case and enter the appropriate
judgment of dismissal, and DENY Vega in
forma pauperis status on appeal.
was arrested and charged in the State of Michigan with
violation of probation in May 2010. Doc. 1-1 at 2. Vega was
later indicted on federal charges for conspiracy to
distribute and possession with intent to distribute cocaine.
On November 24, 2010, a writ of habeas corpus ad
prosequendum was issued. Id. Vega was arraigned
on the federal charges on December 8, 2010 and was sentenced
on these charges on February 7, 2012 to 151 months'
imprisonment. Id. Vega was remanded back to the
State of Michigan on February 18, 2012. Id. at 3.
His projected release date is February 5, 2023, via good
conduct time credit. Doc. 1-2 at 1.
Petition, Vega states that, on July 27, 2010, he was
sentenced in the Sixth Circuit Court of Pontiac (Michigan) to
21 months' to 15 years' imprisonment for count 1 and
to 18 months' to 3 years' imprisonment for violations
of probation in case numbers 08-218861-FH and 08-221303-FH .
Doc. 1-1 at 3. On December 6, 2010, Vega was taken into
federal custody, and on December 8, 2010, Vega was arraigned
in federal court after the issuance of a writ of habeas
corpus ad prosequendum. Id. at 2. Vega was
sentenced in federal court on February 7, 2012 and was
remanded back to the State of Michigan on February 18, 2012.
Id. at 3. Vega asserts he has not received credit
against his federal sentence for the time he spent in federal
custody from December 6, 2010 through February 7, 2012.
Id. at 2, 6. It is this time for which Vega seeks
credit against his federal sentence.
asserts Vega's sentence has been properly calculated, and
he is not entitled to any credit against his federal
sentence. Doc. 7.
Whether Vega is Entitled to Credit Against his
the duty of the United States Attorney General, acting
through the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), to
determine the amount of credit due for the time served by the
defendant “for any time he has spent in official
detention prior to the date the sentence commences.”
United States v. Alexander, 609 F.3d 1250, 1259
(11th Cir. 2010). “A federal district court reviews for
abuse of discretion the BOP's decision under [18 U.S.C.]
§ 3585 regarding commencement of a federal sentence and
the grant of credit for prior custody.” Paradis v.
Keller, No. 1:10-CV-2354, 2011 WL 2790480, at *4
(N.D.Ga. June 13, 2011), report and recommendation
adopted, 2011 WL 2790472 (N.D.Ga. July 14, 2011). To
determine whether the BOP properly calculated Vega's
sentence, the Court must begin with the plain language of the
statute itself. Harris v. Garner, 216 F.3d 970, 972
(11th Cir. 2000) (“We begin our construction of [a
statutory provision] where courts should always begin the
process of legislative interpretation, and where they often
should end it as well, which is with the words of the
statutory provision.”). Section 3585 of Title 18 of the
United States Code, which pertains to “credit for prior
custody, ” is controlling for making credit
determinations for sentences imposed under the Sentencing
Reform Act of 1984. This statute provides:
(a) Commencement of sentence. A sentence to a term of
imprisonment commences on the date the defendant is received
in custody awaiting transportation to, or arrives voluntarily
to commence service of sentence at, the official detention
facility at which the sentence is to be served.
(b) Credit of Prior Custody. A defendant shall be given
credit toward the service of a term of imprisonment for any
time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the
(1) as a result of the offense for which the sentence was
(2) as a result of any other charge for which the defendant
was arrested after the commission of the offense for which