United Statesv.McAllister

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANASep 25, 2017
CRIMINAL ACTION 13-101-SDD-RLB (M.D. La. Sep. 25, 2017)

CRIMINAL ACTION 13-101-SDD-RLB

09-25-2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GODFREY MCALLISTER


RULING

This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc By A Person in Federal Custody filed by Godfrey McAllister ("McAllister"), an inmate in federal custody. The United States ("the Government") has filed an Opposition to this motion. For the reasons set forth below, McAllister's motion shall be DENIED.

Rec. Doc. 27.

Rec. Doc. 29.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On September 24, 2014, the Court sentenced McAllister to a 63 month term of imprisonment to be followed by a three year term of supervised release. On October 20, 2016, McAllister filed the present motion seeking jail time credit per 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). According to McAllister, "the Bureau of Prisons has deprived him the jail time credit for which he spent in both the East Baton Rouge Parish Jail, and the Ascension Parish Jail." McAllister argues that he has been deprived of 21 months jail time credit: 10 months in East Baton Rouge jail, 7 months in Ascension Parish jail, and 4 months in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons. McAllister argues that he is due the 21 month jail time credit because "[his] arrest by federal officials arose from the same incident or occurrence for which the East Baton Rouge Police Department originally arrested him for. (i.e., being a felon [i]n possession of a firearm.)"

Rec. Doc. 25.

Rec. Doc. 27, p. 2.

Id. at p. 3 (emphasis original).

Id.

Id. (emphasis original).

The Government argues that the Court may not decide the present motion because McAllister has not exhausted his administrative remedies. The Government argues in the alternative, "[e]ven if defendant could demonstrate that he had exhausted his administrative remedies, this Court still would not have jurisdiction to review a § 2241 motion. A properly filed § 2241 motion must be filed in the district court where the defendant is presently incarcerated, or the prisoner's immediate custodian."

Rec. Doc. 29, p. 3.

Id. at p. 4.

II. LAW AND ANALYSIS - § 2241

The Fifth Circuit in Pack v. Yusuff held: "A section 2241 petition on behalf of a sentenced prisoner attacks the manner in which a sentence is carried out or the prison authorities' determination of its duration, and must be filed in the same district where the prisoner is incarcerated." McAllister is incarcerated at a federal prison in Pollock, Louisiana. Pollock, Louisiana is located within the jurisdiction the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Accordingly, given the Fifth Circuit's holding in Pack, the Court cannot grant the Defendant's section 2241 motion because he is not incarcerated within the district of this Court.

218 F.3d 448, 451 (5th Cir. 2000).

Rec. Doc. 27-2, p. 1.

III. CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, the Defendant's Motion for Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.

Rec. Doc. 27. --------

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on September 25, 2017.

/s/ _________


JUDGE SHELLY D. DICK


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA