Lornette vs. Warden, FCI Pekin
| David Joseph Lornette |
| Warden |
| 1:2022cv01393 |
| November 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| James E Shadid |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by David Joseph Lornette. (JS) |
TEXT ORDER: Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 #1 challenging the Bureau of Prison's calculation of his federal sentence. Petitioner's federal sentence was ordered to be served consecutively to his anticipated state sentence. However, a few days later, when he was sentenced in state court, the state judge ordered his state sentence to be served concurrently to his federal sentence. Now that his state sentence is complete, Petitioner is unhappy to learn that the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) will not credit his federal sentence with the time he spent in state custody. However, Petitioner does not appear to have exhausted his administrative remedies with the BOP regarding his claim. Habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. 2241 have no express exhaustion requirements, but "[a] common-law exhaustion rule applies." Richmond v. Scibana, 387 F.3d 602, 604 (7th Cir. 2004). Courts generally review a claim by a federal prisoner challenging their sentence computation by the BOP only after they exhaust the BOPs administrative remedy process. Antonelli v. Gilkey, 191 F.3d 455 (7th Cir. 1999). The exhaustion requirement accomplishes two important policy objectives: protection of the agency's authority and promotion of judicial economy. Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 89 (2006). However, since exhaustion is not mandated by statute, "sound judicial discretion governs." Gonzalez v. O'Connell, 355 F.3d 1010, 1016 (7th Cir. 2004), citing McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. 140, 148, 112 S. Ct. 1081, 1088 (1992). Petitioner is DIRECTED to show cause within thirty (30) days as to why the Court should not summarily dismiss his Petition under Rule 1 and Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 28 U.S.C. 2254 Proceedings in United States District Courts. If Petitioner fails to do so, the Court will dismiss the Petition without prejudice. Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 12/19/2022. (JS)
|
| Filing 2 Mail Returned as Undeliverable, Insufficient Address- Unable to Forward re filing fee receipt. (JS) |
| Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 100001300 (FDS) |
|
TEXT ORDER Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 11/17/2022. Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 but has not paid the filing fee. Petitioner is directed to pay the filing fee of $5.00 within 30 days of this Order. If Petitioner is unable to pay the required filing fee, he may file a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. If Petitioner fails to pay the required filing fee or file a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis within 30 days, his Petition under 28 U.S.C. 2241 for Writ of Habeas #1 will be dismissed without prejudice by this court. (AEM)
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) filed by David Joseph Lornette.(FDS) |
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 Illinois Central 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
| Search for this case: Lornette vs. Warden, FCI Pekin | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: David Joseph Lornette | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Warden | |
| Represented By: | W. Scott Simpson |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
