Plain v. Eischen

No. 25-cv-3154 (LMP/DTS) (D. Minn. Oct. 10, 2025) · United States District Court for the District of Minnesota · October 10, 2025 · No. 0:25-cv-03154

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota overruled Darrell Plain’s objections to a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and dismissed his habeas petition without prejudice. The court held that, despite the absence of an express statutory citation in the indictment, plea agreement, and judgment, the documents established that Plain was serving a sentence for violating 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi), making him ineligible for First Step Act earned time credits.

Court
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
Writing for the Court
Laura M. Provinzino
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
Decision date
October 10, 2025
Docket number
0:25-cv-03154
Procedural posture
Petitioner sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging the Bureau of Prisons' determination that he was ineligible to earn First Step Act earned time credits. After the magistrate judge recommended dismissal, petitioner objected. The district court reviewed the challenged portions of the report and recommendation de novo and adopted it.
Standard of review
De novo review of the challenged conclusions in the magistrate judge's report and recommendation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(3).
Precedential value
Nonprecedential district court order
Parties
Darrell Plain v. B. Eischen, Warden
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

federal habeas corpuspost-conviction reliefstatutory interpretationsentencingcriminal procedure

Practice areas

federal habeas corpuspost-conviction reliefstatutory interpretationsentencing

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Plain was serving a sentence for a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi) despite the indictment, plea agreement, and sentencing judgment not expressly citing that subsection.
  2. Whether Plain was therefore ineligible to earn First Step Act earned time credits under 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(D)(lxvi).

Holdings

  1. Plain was convicted of and sentenced for a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi), even though the indictment, plea agreement, and sentencing judgment cited § 841(a)(1) rather than expressly citing § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi).
  2. Plain was ineligible to earn First Step Act earned time credits because he was serving a sentence for a conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi), an offense excluded by 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(D)(lxvi).

Key quotations

these three documents make crystal clear that Plain was indeed convicted of and sentenced for a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi).
Plain is therefore ineligible to earn FTCs under the FSA.

Factual background

Plain pleaded guilty in the Northern District of Illinois to distributing 40 grams or more of fentanyl, and he was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. His indictment, plea agreement, and sentencing judgment cited 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) but did not expressly cite § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi). The Bureau of Prisons determined that he was ineligible for First Step Act earned time credits because § 3632(d)(4)(D)(lxvi) excludes prisoners serving sentences for violations of § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi).

Procedural history

Plain was convicted and sentenced in the Northern District of Illinois after pleading guilty to distributing 40 grams or more of fentanyl. While incarcerated in Minnesota, he filed a habeas petition arguing that he was eligible for First Step Act earned time credits because the charging and sentencing documents cited 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), rather than § 841(b)(1)(B)(vi). Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz recommended dismissal. The district court overruled Plain's objections, adopted the report and recommendation, and dismissed the petition without prejudice.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…