Summary
The Fifth Circuit affirmed denial of a § 2241 habeas petition, holding that a prisoner erroneously released from state custody while subject to a federal detainer is not entitled to sentence credit for time at liberty because he was not in BOP custody. The court also rejected claims that a typographical error in the judgment (incorrect USM number) constituted government error warranting credit under the waiver-of-jurisdiction standard from *Shields* and *Piper*, and that no revocation hearing was required since the time at liberty was not supervised release. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying an evidentiary hearing where the petitioner could not show entitlement to relief even if his factual allegations were proven.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Semien was entitled to a revocation hearing before returning to federal custody.
- Whether Semien was entitled to sentence credit for time at liberty while subject to federal detention orders.
- Whether Semien was entitled to sentence credit because the erroneous release was caused by the Marshals Service.
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying an evidentiary hearing.
Holdings
- Semien was not entitled to a revocation hearing because he was released from state custody, not federal custody, and his time at liberty was not a term of supervised release.
- Semien is not entitled to sentence credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) because he was not subject to BOP control during the time at liberty.
- Semien is not entitled to sentence credit for time at liberty after erroneous release, as the government's error (a typo in the judgment) was not so affirmatively wrong or grossly negligent as to waive jurisdiction, and the government showed interest by arresting him after 5 years.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion because Semien would not be entitled to relief even if he proved the alleged facts.
Key quotations
“"A defendant who is 'released' is not in BOP's custody" while "[a] defendant who is 'detained,' however, is completely subject to BOP's control."” (at 5)
“"it is not sufficient to prove official conduct that merely evidences a lack of eager pursuit or even arguable lack of interest."” (at 6)
“"the waiving state's action [must be] so affirmatively wrong or its inaction so grossly negligent that it would be unequivocally inconsistent with 'fundamental principles of liberty and justice' to require a legal sentence to be served in the aftermath of such action or inaction."” (at 6)
Factual background
In December 2005, Semien was indicted in the Eastern District of Texas for drug and firearm offenses. At the time, he was held by Texas authorities for a parole violation. He was transferred to federal custody via writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, convicted by a jury, and sentenced to 115 months imprisonment, consecutive to any future parole revocation. He was returned to state custody, his parole was revoked in April 2007, but he was erroneously released from state custody on February 13, 2009. The U.S. Marshals Service arrested him on May 2, 2014. He sought credit towards his federal sentence for the time at liberty.
Procedural history
Semien filed a § 2241 petition in the Eastern District of Texas, seeking credit against his federal sentence for time spent at liberty after erroneous release from state custody. The magistrate judge recommended denial, the district court overruled objections and adopted the report, denying the petition. Semien appealed.