Torres v. Warden et al
| Lisa Torres |
| Puzzio, BOP, Warden, Tremsley and Darek Puzio |
| 3:2024cv01621 |
| October 10, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Kari A Dooley |
| S Dave Vatti |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 3, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 19
ORDER re: #17 Response. The Court has construed Petitioner's #17 Response as seeking reconsideration of the Court's 16 Order denying the #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and #2 Emergency Motion for Modification of Sentence. "A motion for reconsideration is an extraordinary request that is granted only in rare circumstances, such as where the court failed to consider evidence or binding authority." Van Buskirk v. United Grp. of Companies, Inc., 935 F.3d 49, 54 (2d Cir. 2019). "The standard for granting such a motion is strict, and reconsideration will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked--matters, in other words, that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion reached by the court." Id. (quoting Shrader v. CSX Transp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255, 257 (2d Cir. 1995)). Here, Petitioner's Response merely seeks to relitigate issues already decided. See Young v. Choinski, 15 F. Supp. 3d 194, 197 (D. Conn. 2014) ("It is well-settled that a motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple.") (internal quotations omitted). Petitioner does not identify any data, law or decision overlooked. She merely reiterates her claims, which the Court has already determined are without merit. Accordingly, and for the reasons previously articulated, Petitioner's request for reconsideration is DENIED. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on December 3, 2024. (Spears, A.)
|
| Filing 18 EXHIBITS by Lisa Torres to #17 Response to Order to Show Cause. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 17 RESPONSE TO #11 Order to Show Cause by Lisa Torres. (Fanelle, N.) |
|
Filing 16
ORDER denying #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and #2 Emergency Motion for Modification of Sentence. Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus seeking relief on two grounds. First, she asks that all applicable credits under the First Step Act ("FSA") and Second Chance Act ("SCA") be applied "up front," to advance her eligibility for release to home confinement. See ECF No. 1 at 7. Second, she seeks compassionate release. See id. Plaintiff has also filed an Emergency Motion for Modification of Sentence requesting that the Court order the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") to update her time credits to ensure that she does not remain in custody any longer than necessary. ECF No. 2. In response to the Court's Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 11), Respondent seeks denial of the Petition. See ECF No. 14. As an initial matter, the Court has previously indicated that compassionate release may only be ordered by the sentencing judge, see ECF No. 7, and in this case, Petitioner has already submitted a request for compassionate release to her sentencing judge, which was denied on September 10, 2024. See United States v. Torres, No. 23-CR-0003 (MSM) (LDA), 2024 WL 4136466, at *1 (D.R.I. Sept. 10, 2024); see also Castelle v. Pullen, No. 3:22-CV-297 (KAD), 2022 WL 4448898 (D. Conn. Sept. 23, 2022) ("A request for a sentence reduction or for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. 3582 must be made to the sentencing court that imposed the sentence.") (citations omitted). As this Court lacks authority to grant the request for compassionate release, the Petition is denied on this basis alone. See Dov v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 20-CV-4343 (SLC), 2020 WL 3869107, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 9, 2020) (denying request for compassionate release where sentencing judge, in another district, had previously denied motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A)). Petitioner also seeks immediate application of FSA credits. Under the FSA, inmates earn time credits for successful participation in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and other productive activities. These credits qualify the inmates for early release from custody including transfer to a residential reentry center, home confinement, or supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. 3632(d)(4)(C), 3624(g)(1)(A). However, although an inmate may be accumulating time credits each month, she is only "eligible" to have those credits applied to her sentence when she has "earned time credits under the risk and needs assessment system... in an amount that is equal to the remainder of the prisoner's imposed term of imprisonment." 18 U.S.C. 3624(g)(1)(A). Petitioner was sentenced on April 11, 2024 to a term of imprisonment of 102 months, and her home confinement eligibility date is July 27, 2029. See Sentence Monitoring Computation Data, Resp't's Mem., ECF No. 14, Ex. 1 at 2. As of November 11, 2024, Petitioner had accumulated only 40 FSA time credits. See id. As the home confinement eligibility date is over four years away, Petitioner has not accumulated sufficient time credits to be eligible for those credits to be applied to her sentence. Therefore, Petitioner's request for application of her FSA time credits is denied. Additionally, the Court further observes that it lacks authority to order Petitioner transferred to home confinement. Rather, the "BOP has the exclusive authority to determine the facility in which an inmate will serve [her] sentence and to transfer the inmate from one facility to another." Castelle, 2022 WL 4448898, at *4 (citation and quotation marks omitted). Thus, any decision regarding the place of an inmate's confinement "is not reviewable by any court." 18 U.S.C. 3621(b); see also U.S. v Kanagbou, 726 F. App'x 21, 25 n.1 (2d Cir. 2018) ("district court does not control how the Executive Branch carries out a defendant's sentence"); Milchin v. Warden, No. 3:22-CV-195 (KAD), 2022 WL 1658836, at *2 (D. Conn. May 25, 2022) (district courts lacks jurisdiction to order prisoner transferred to home confinement) (citation omitted). For all of the foregoing reasons, Petitioner's #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and #2 Emergency Motion for Modification of Sentence are DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on November 22, 2024. (Spears, A)
|
| Filing 15 Amended CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Darek Puzio re #14 Response to Order to Show Cause (Putnam, Nathaniel) |
| Filing 14 RESPONSE TO #11 Order to Show Cause by Darek Puzio filed by Darek Puzio. (Attachments: #1 Ex. 1, #2 Ex. 2, #3 Ex. 3)(Putnam, Nathaniel) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Nathaniel Michael Putnam on behalf of Darek Puzio in his official capacity as the Acting Warden of FCI Danbury (Putnam, Nathaniel) |
| Filing 12 Letter from Lisa Torres dated 10/25/2024 Re: Time Credits (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing fee received from Lisa Torres: $ 5.00, BPT-14644. (Pesta, J.) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re: #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Response due by November 25, 2024. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on October 18, 2024. (Spears, Andrew)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER granting #9 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis.If you change your address at any time during the litigation of this case, Local Rule 83.1(c)2 provides that you notify the court. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Farrish on 10/17/2024. (Corriette, M.)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Lisa Torres. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE re: Request for Payment by Lisa Torres. (Fanelle, N.) |
|
Filing 7
NOTICE: Plaintiff filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2241 in which she seeks an order compelling the Bureau of Prisons to adjust her earned time credits consistent with Bureau policy. However, she also appears to seek a sentence reduction and compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). She argues that the health issues faced by her son, granddaughter, and mother, and other factors demonstrate extraordinary and compelling reasons for such a reduction. This Court has the authority to take up Petitioner's claims regarding her earned time credits under the First Step Act, which it will do in due course. However, any request for a sentence reduction or compassionate release must be made in the district court where Petitioner was sentenced. See United States v. Avery, 807 F. App'x 74, 77 (2d Cir. 2020); United States v. De Jesus Sierra, No. 10 CR 416 (VM), 2021 WL 354954, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2021) (explaining that "Congress amended 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) to provide the sentencing judge jurisdiction to consider a defense motion for Reduction in Sentence (RIS or 'Compassionate Release')"); Dov v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 20 Civ. 4343 (SLC), 2020 WL 3869107, *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 9, 2020) (denying compassionate release where the sentencing judge, in another district, had previously denied a motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A), noting that "such a request must... be made to the sentencing court"). Petitioner was sentenced in the district of Rhode Island by District Judge McElroy. The Court further observes that Petitioner already filed a motion for compassionate release before the sentencing court which was denied on September 10, 2024. See United States v. Torres, No. 23-CR-0003-MSM -LDA, 2024 WL 4136466, at *1 (D.R.I. Sept. 10, 2024). Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 10/10/2024. (Alquesta, S)
|
| Filing 6 Notice of Option to Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. (Fanelle, N.) |
|
Filing 5
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 10/10/2024. (Fanelle, N.)
|
|
Filing 4
Standing Protective Order Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 10/10/2024. (Fanelle, N.)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER: We received your Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus which has been assigned case number 3:24-cv-01621. In order to proceed, the filing fee or a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis must be submitted to the Court by 11/9/2024 or the case will be subject to dismissal. Fee information and the Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis form may be found on the Court's website at ctd.uscourts.gov. Dismissal due by 11/9/2024. Signed by Clerk on 10/10/2024. (Fanelle, N.)
|
| Filing 2 EMERGENCY MOTION for Modification of Sentence by Lisa Torres. Responses due by 10/31/2024. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Lisa Torres. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Judge Kari A. Dooley and Judge S. Dave Vatti added. (Oliver, T.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
