Stephen Norwood v. John Fox


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Pasco M. Bowman and Steven M. Colloton (UNPUBLISHED) [4353417] [15-1767]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-1767 ___________________________ Stephen Wayne Norwood lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. John Fox, Interim Warden, FCI - Forrest City lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena ____________ Submitted: December 23, 2015 Filed: January 7, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 15-1767 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/07/2016 Entry ID: 4353417 Federal inmate Stephen Norwood appeals the district court’s1 denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought prior-custody credit towards service of his federal sentence. Upon careful de novo review, see Abdullah v. Hedrick, 392 F.3d 957, 959 (8th Cir. 2004), we conclude that Norwood was not entitled to relief. It is undisputed that the entire time period at issue was credited against a state sentence that he was serving (notwithstanding his contention that the state lost “primary” custody over him at some point). Thus, the time was not eligible for credit against his federal sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b); Elwell v. Fisher, 716 F.3d 477, 481 (8th Cir. 2013). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jerome T. Kearney, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2- Appellate Case: 15-1767 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/07/2016 Entry ID: 4353417

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.

Why Is My Information Online?