James Biear v. Warden Fort Dix FCI

Filing

NOT PRECEDENTIAL PER CURIAM OPINION Coram: AMBRO, GREENAWAY JR. and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges. Total Pages: 5. BLD-099 *To the extent that Biear includes his notice of Appeal as a request for appointment of appellate counsel, his request is denied as moot.

Case: 16-3414

Document: 003112535795

Page: 1

BLD-099

Date Filed: 02/09/2017

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 16-3414
___________
JAMES S. BIEAR,
Appellant
v.
WARDEN FORT DIX FCI
____________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey
(D.C. Civil No. 1-13-cv-03501)
District Judge: Honorable Noel L. Hillman
____________________________________

Submitted for Possible Dismissal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) or
Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
January 12, 2017
Before: AMBRO, GREENAWAY, JR., and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: February 9, 2017)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
James Steven Biear, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals from the District
Court’s order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
*

This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.

Case: 16-3414

Document: 003112535795

Page: 2

Date Filed: 02/09/2017

§ 2241. For the following reasons, we will summarily affirm the District Court’s order.
I.
On November 23, 2009, federal authorities in the Southern District of New York
arrested Biear and charged him with ten counts of money laundering, wire fraud, and
related offenses stemming from a fraud scheme.1 The next day, on November 24, 2009,
federal authorities released him on bail into the custody of New York state authorities to
answer to state criminal charges. On January 4, 2010, Biear was temporarily returned to
federal custody pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum to face the federal
charges. He was ultimately convicted of all ten counts and sentenced to 120 months of
imprisonment, followed by four years of supervised release.2 Biear remained in federal
custody until April 2, 2012, when he was transferred back to New York authorities. On
August 16, 2012, Biear was convicted in the New York Supreme Court of Falsely
Reporting an Incident, N.Y. Penal Law § 240.50, and sentenced to a term of “time
served.” That same day, Biear was returned to permanent federal custody to serve the
remainder of his federal sentence.
Several months later, while serving his sentence at Fort Dix, Biear filed a request
for an administrative remedy challenging the Bureau of Prison’s (BOP) sentence
1

According to the superseding indictment, Biear worked as a driver and personal
assistant for Kenward Elmslie, the heir to the Pulitzer fortune. From May 2005 through
September 2007, Biear carried out a scheme to defraud Elmslie of his artwork, money,
and other valuable property. Biear then used the proceeds of the crimes committed
against Elmslie to defraud other victims.
2

The judgment was silent as to its relationship, if any, to the pending New York action.
2

Case: 16-3414

Document: 003112535795

Page: 3

Date Filed: 02/09/2017

computation. Specifically, Biear argued that he was entitled to credit against his federal
sentence for all the time he spent in custody prior to the start of his federal sentence—that
is, from November 24, 2009, the day of his arrest, through August 15, 2012, the day
before his federal sentence commenced. The BOP: (1) awarded credit for the day of his
arrest, November 24, 2009; (2) denied credit for the time Biear spent in custody from
November 24, 2009, through November 23, 2010, because that period was credited
toward his New York sentence;3 and (3) awarded credit for Biear’s remaining time in
custody, from November 24, 2010, through August 15, 2012.
Biear also sought credit toward his federal sentence for the time credited to his
state sentence by requesting the BOP to designate, nunc pro tunc, the state prison as a
federal place of confinement. The BOP denied the request based on Biear’s criminal
history and institutional disciplinary records, as well as the sentencing judge’s
recommendation against extending any additional leniency. See 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b).
In June 2013, Biear filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241 in the District of New Jersey challenging the BOP’s sentencing
determinations. The District Court reviewed the record and found no error. Therefore,

The BOP explained that, although the state sentenced Biear to “time served,” his term
of imprisonment could not exceed one year because the underlying conviction was
subject to a one-year maximum. See N.Y. State Penal Law §§ 240.50, 70.15(1). Thus,
the BOP determined that Biear was in state custody from November 24, 2009, the day of
his arrest, until one-year later, November 23, 2010.
3

3

Case: 16-3414

Document: 003112535795

Page: 4

Date Filed: 02/09/2017

by order entered August 2, 2016, the District Court denied the petition. This timely
appeal followed.4
II.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.5 A petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is available to a federal prisoner who, like
Biear, challenges the execution of his sentence. See Cardona v. Bledsoe, 681 F.3d 533,
535 (3d Cir. 2012). We exercise plenary review over the District Court’s legal
conclusions and apply a clearly erroneous standard to its factual findings. See id.
Woodall v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 432 F.3d 235, 239 n.3 (3d Cir. 2005).
We will summarily affirm the District Court’s order because this appeal does not
present a substantial question. See Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6. The District
Court correctly upheld the BOP’s calculation of Biear’s federal release date. First, the
BOP properly determined that Biear’s federal sentence commenced on August 16, 2012,
when the New York court sentenced him to “time served,” discharged him from New
York custody, and released him into the exclusive custody of federal authorities. See 18
U.S.C. § 3585(a). Next, the BOP properly granted Biear custody credit for: (1) the day of
November 23, 2009, the date federal authorities arrested him and released him into state

4

The record reflects that Biear subsequently sought reconsideration of the District
Court’s decision, and that, by order entered September 1, 2016, the District Court denied
his request. That order is not presently before us. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii).
5

A certificate of appealability is not required to appeal from the denial of a § 2241
petition. See Burkey v. Marberry, 556 F.3d 142, 146 (3d Cir. 2009).
4

Case: 16-3414

Document: 003112535795

Page: 5

Date Filed: 02/09/2017

custody; and (2) the period from November 24, 2010, the day after his one-year state
sentence expired, through August 15, 2012, the day before his federal sentence
commenced. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). The BOP also properly declined to double-count
the one-year period (from November 24, 2009, through November 23, 2010) that was
credited to his New York sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) (providing that a federal
inmate may not receive credit against his federal sentence for prior custody that has been
“credited against another sentence”). Lastly, we agree with the District Court that the
BOP did not abuse its “wide discretion” in denying Biear’s application for a nunc pro
tunc designation. See Barden v. Keohane, 921 F.2d 476, 482-83 (3d Cir. 1990).
We have reviewed Biear’s arguments on appeal and conclude that they are
unpersuasive.
III.
Accordingly, we will summarily affirm the District Court’s judgment.6

6

To the extent that Biear includes in his Notice of Appeal a request for appointment of
appellate counsel, his request is denied as moot.
5