Riddle v. Outlaw et al
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION recommending that the District Court dimsiss the 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with prejudice. Objections to R&R due no later than 14 days from the date the Recommended Disposition is received. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 1/20/10. (hph)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS E A S T E R N DIVISION J A C K I E L. RIDDLE R e g # 17056-045 VS. NO. 2:08-CV-00081-SWW-BD PETITIONER
T .C . OUTLAW, Warden, Federal Correctional Complex, F o r r e st City, Arkansas
R ESPON D EN T
R E C O M M E N D E D DISPOSITION I. P r o c e d u r e for Filing Objections T h e following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District J u d g e Susan Webber Wright. Any party may file written objections to this re c o m m e n d a tio n . Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal b a s is for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that f in d in g and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your o b je c tio n s must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later th a n fourteen (14) days from the date you receive the Recommended Disposition. A copy w ill be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in w a iv e r of the right to appeal questions of fact.
Mail your objections and "Statement of Necessity" to: C le rk , United States District Court E a s te rn District of Arkansas 6 0 0 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 L ittle Rock, AR 72201-3325 II. B a c k g r o u n d and Discussion Petitioner is serving an eighty-four month sentence in the Bureau of Prisons (" B O P " ) after pleading guilty to conspiracy to manufacture and distribute in excess of f if ty grams of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(a), 841(b)(1)(B), and 8 4 6 , and criminal forfeiture in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 853. (Docket entry #2 at p. 13) On May 8, 2008, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (#2), claiming that under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e), he is eligible for a reduction in his s e n te n c e because he successfully completed a residential drug abuse program. (#2 at p. 4) On July 7, 2008, the Court entered an order (#13) granting Petitioner's motion to s ta y his petition pending a decision by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Gatewood v . Outlaw, 560 F.3d 843 (8th Cir. 2009). On March 26, 2009, the Eighth Circuit a f f irm e d the District Court's dismissal of the Gatewood habeas petition. Id. In that case, th e Court rejected the Ninth Circuit's analysis in Arrington v. Daniles, 516 F.3d 1106 (9th C ir. 2008) and held that the BOP's regulations, which disqualify prisoners whose offense in v o lv e s firearms from early release after successful completion of a residential drug a b u s e program, do not violate the Administrative Procedures Act.
Petitioner has now moved to lift the stay and reopen his case after the United S ta te s Supreme Court denied certiorari and denied a petition for rehearing in Gatewood. (#16) See Gatewood v. T.C. Outlaw, 560 F.3d 843, cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 490 (2009), p e titio n for rehearing denied, 2010 WL 58841 (Jan. 11, 2010). The District Court g ra n te d the motion to reopen the case and referred the case to this Court for re c o m m e n d e d disposition. (#17) In his motion to lift the stay, Petitioner again asks the Court to grant him eligibility f o r early release based upon his completion of the residential drug abuse program. He a c k n o w le d g e s that the Gatewood decision is dispositive but claims the Eighth Circuit e rre d in rejecting the Ninth Circuit's analysis in Arrington. Petitioner pled guilty to offenses under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B), and 8 4 6 , and at sentencing the Court enhanced Petitioner 's sentence for possession of a f ire a rm during the offense. Accordingly, under 28 C.F.R. § 550.55(b)(5)(ii) and BOP P ro g ra m Statement 5162.05,1 Petitioner is ineligible for a reduction in his sentence under 1 8 U.S.C. § 3621(e). Id. at 849. III. C o n c lu s io n B a se d on the Eighth Circuit's ruling in Gatewood, the Court recommends that the D is tric t Court dismiss the petition with prejudice.
T itle 28 C.F.R. § 550.55 became effective on March 16, 2009. On the same day, th e Bureau of Prisons issued Program Statement 5162.05 and rescinded Program S ta te m e n t 5162.04. 3
DATED this 20th day of January, 2010.
___________________________________ U N IT E D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?