Crosby v. Bureru of Prisons
| Jerome Crosby |
| Bureru of Prisons |
| 1:2020cv00452 |
| April 16, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Richard J Arcara |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 JUDGMENT in favor of Bureru of Prisons against Jerome Crosby. Signed by Mary C. Loewenguth, Clerk of Court on 5/13/20. (SG) |
| Remark: Clerk mailed copy of documents # 5 & 7 as well as an Appeal Packet to Jerome Crosby. (MD) |
| Filing 6 Remark: A copy of text order 5 has been mailed to Jerome Crosby, 14B3300, ULSTER CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, P.O. Box 800, Napanoch, NY 12458 (LAS) |
| Filing 5 TEXT ORDER: having read the Petition #1 and the petitioner's response #4 to the Court's Text Order 2 liberally, and having interpreted them to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest, see, Graham v. Henderson, 89 F.3d 75, 79 (2d Cir.1996) (quotation omitted), the Court recharacterizes the petition as brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 because it challenges the Federal Bureau of Prisons' execution of the petitioner's sentence. Though petitioner is currently in state custody in another judicial district, he is serving a sentence imposed by a state court in this District, and a 2241 petition may therefore be brought here. 28 U.S.C. 2241(d). However, because the defendant has time yet to serve in state custody on his 10-year state sentence, and because there has not yet been a credit determination by the Bureau of Prisons, see #4 7, the Court concludes the case is unripe. See, Evans v. United States, 2010 WL 2026433 (E.D.N.Y. 2010), aff'd 419 Fed. Appx. 53, 2011 WL 1261630 (2d Cir. 2011). It is firmly settled that this Court lacks authority to order the Bureau of Prisons to either grant or deny credit to petitioner or to disregard the Bureau of Prisons' calculations of credit, and although the petitioner might technically be eligible for early release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) if he were in exclusive federal custody, it appears he is not eligible for release from state custody. Petitioner's claims are therefore not yet fit for judicial decision and withholding Court intervention until the Bureau of Prisons designates the petitioner's place of confinement and formally calculates credit for time served will not be a hardship on petitioner sufficient to warrant the premature consideration of his claims that he seeks. The Petition #1 is therefore dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk shall close the case. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on May 5, 2020. (WJG)---CLERK TO FOLLOW UP--- |
| Filing 4 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Jerome Crosby. (JLV) |
| Filing 3 Remark: A copy of text order 2 is being mailed to Jerome Crosby, 14B3300, ULSTER CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, P.O. Box 800, Napanoch, NY 12458 today (LAS) |
| Filing 2 TEXT ORDER: petitioner Jerome Crosby, a prisoner serving a state sentence at Ulster Correctional Facility in Napanoch, New York, brings this petition pro se pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 and claims that he is entitled to: (1) day-for-day credit against an undischarged term of federal imprisonment imposed by this Court for 59 days of custody served in federal pretrial detention; and (2) to retroactive commencement of his federal sentence and designation of New York prison facilities as the place of federal confinement. Because petitioner Crosby seeks to challenge the execution of his sentence, his claims are properly construed as a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241, not 2255. Levine v. Apker, 455 F.3d 71, 77-78 (2d Cir. 2006) ; see Thompson v. Choinski, 525 F.3d 205, 209 (2d Cir. 2008) (a habeas corpus petition filed by a pro se petitioner is to be construed liberally). However, in order for the Court to have jurisdiction under 2241 over the two claims of petitioner under 18 U.S.C. 3585(b) and 3621, respectively, he must establish that he has obtained final administrative determinations from the Federal Bureau of Prisons and he must establish that he has exhausted his administrative remedies. United States v. Whaley, 148 F.3d 205, 206 (2d Cir.1998); see e.g., Evans v. Larkin, No. 2:11-CV-4706, 2014 WL 3882333, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 7, 2014); see also, Dent v. Fink, 408 F.Supp.2d 103, 106 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (That... a concurrent sentence was imposed, does mean that the prohibition on double credits does not govern), amended on other grounds, No. 05CV2121 (NG) MDG, 2006 WL 1027105 (E.D.N.Y. Feb 01, 2006), aff'd 206 Fed.Appx. 98 (2d Cir. 2006). For these reasons, petitioner is hereby ordered to show cause on or before May 21, 2020, why his habeas corpus petition should not be dismissed by this Court for lack of jurisdiction because he has not alleged facts showing both that his claims are ripe for judicial review because the Bureau of Prisons has rendered final decisions and that his claims have been fully exhausted through administrative appeals. Failure timely to comply with this Text Order may result in dismissal of the petition. SO ORDERED. A copy of this Text Order denying the motion for a retroactive recommendation is being mailed to petitioner Jerome Crosby, No. 14B3300, ULSTER CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, P.O. Box 800, Napanoch, N.Y. 12458. Issued by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on April 17, 2020. (WJG) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Jerome Crosby.(CGJ) |
| Filing fee received: $ 5.00, receipt number BUF068105 (CGJ) |
| Remark: Petitioner has been mailed a pro se packet including a privacy notice, consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge, and a civil case timeline. (CGJ) |
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 New York Western 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: Crosby v. Bureru of Prisons | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Jerome Crosby | |
| 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: Bureru of Prisons | |
| 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.
