Presiliano Yanez-Villegas v. B. Birkholz

Summary

The court denied a federal prisoner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging the Bureau of Prisons’ calculation of presentence custody credit. It held that the petitioner’s federal sentence could run concurrently only with the undischarged portion of his previously imposed state sentence and that credit for the three-year period in state custody would constitute impermissible double credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). The action was dismissed with prejudice.

Holdings

1. A challenge to the execution and calculation of a federal sentence, including the BOP's award of custody credit, is properly brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 rather than as a challenge to the conviction or sentence itself.
2. A federal sentence commences no earlier than the date it is imposed and may run concurrently with only the undischarged portion of a previously imposed state sentence; a concurrency order cannot make the federal sentence concurrent with a portion of the state sentence that had already been served.
3. Petitioner was not entitled to credit against his federal sentence for the approximately three years he spent in state custody for a parole violation because that period was credited against his state sentence and therefore could not also be credited against his federal sentence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether petitioner's challenge to the BOP's calculation of sentence credit was properly brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
2. Whether a federal sentence ordered to run concurrently with a previously imposed state sentence can commence before the date it is imposed or receive credit for time already credited against the state sentence.
3. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) entitled petitioner to federal sentence credit for approximately three years spent in state custody for a parole violation before his federal sentence commenced.

Disposition

dismissed