Keys v. Cross
Filing
4
IT IS ORDERED that respondent shall answer or otherwise plead by May 28, 2013. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall either pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit his motion for leave to proceed IFP, no later than May 29, 2013. Failure to comply with this Order SHALL result in dismissal of this case without further notice. James N. Cross answer due 5/28/2013. (Action due by 5/29/2013). Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 5/6/2013. (tjk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
JERRY KEYS, # 37390-044,
Petitioner,
vs.
Case No. 13-cv-410-DRH
JAMES N. CROSS,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HERNDON, Chief District Judge:
Petitioner, currently incarcerated in the Greenville Federal Correctional
institution (“Greenville”), brings this habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241.
He challenges the respondent’s decision regarding the length of his
placement in a Residential Reentry Center (“RRC”) as well as his eligibility for six
months of home confinement during the final portion of his sentence.
The
petition was filed on April 29, 2013. In addition, petitioner has filed a motion for
an expedited emergency hearing (Doc. 3).
Petitioner pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine, and was sentenced
on December 10, 2010, to 120 months in prison. United States v. Keys, 10-cr344 (E.D. Mo.). In September 2012, his sentence was reduced to 60 months after
the new sentencing guidelines were applied.
Petitioner asserts that he will become eligible for RRC (halfway house)
placement as of May 18, 2013, if he were granted the full 12 months of RRC
Page 1 of 4
placement that is available under the Second Chance Act (Doc. 1, p. 7). See 18
U.S.C.A. § 3624(c).1 The petition does not clearly state what amount of RRC time
petitioner was granted. However, he argues that the decision was arbitrary and
biased, because other similarly situated inmates have been granted the full 12
months of RRC placement, yet he was given less time. Petitioner further states
that he challenged the adverse decision and has exhausted the administrative
appeal process (Doc. 1, p. 7).
As relief, he seeks a “complete and unbiased
review” of his needs for rehabilitative placement, as well as an injunction to
require the Bureau of Prisons to implement a fair and unbiased system of
evaluating inmates for RRC placement (Doc. 1, p. 8).
Pending Motion
The motion for an expedited emergency hearing (Doc. 3) is DENIED. After
the government has had an opportunity to respond as directed below, the Court
shall determine whether a hearing is warranted.
Filing Fee
Petitioner filed this habeas action without payment of the $5.00 filing fee,
nor did he file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). The Clerk
has advised him of his filing fee obligations (Doc. 2) and has furnished him a
blank form motion for leave to proceed IFP.
1
According to the inmate locator feature on the website of the Bureau of Prison (www.bop.gov),
petitioner’s projected release date is November 15, 2014. Based on this projection, petitioner
would have to be granted the full 12 months of RRC placement, on top of the full six months of
home confinement, in order to be released from Greenville on May 18, 2013.
Page 2 of 4
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner shall either pay the $5.00
filing fee or submit his motion for leave to proceed IFP, no later than May 29,
2013. Failure to comply with this Order SHALL result in dismissal of this
case without further notice. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
Disposition
Without commenting on the merits of petitioner’s claims, the Court
concludes that the petition survives preliminary review under Rule 4 and Rule
1(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts. 2
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent shall answer or otherwise
plead by May 28, 2013. This preliminary order to respond does not, of course,
preclude the Government from raising any objection or defense it may wish to
present.
Service upon the United States Attorney for the Southern District of
Illinois, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, Illinois, shall constitute sufficient
service.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this entire matter be REFERRED to a
United States Magistrate Judge for disposition, as contemplated by Local Rule
72.2(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), only if all the parties consent to such a
referral.
Petitioner is ADVISED of his continuing obligation to keep the Clerk (and
each opposing party) informed of any change in his whereabouts during the
2
Rule 1(b) of those Rules gives this Court the authority to apply the rules to other habeas corpus
cases.
Page 3 of 4
pendency of this action. This notification shall be done in writing and not later
than seven (7) days after a transfer or other change in address occurs. Failure to
provide such notice may result in dismissal of this action. See FED. R. CIV. P.
41(b).
David R.
Herndon
2013.05.06
15:45:01 -05'00'
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 6, 2013
Chief Judge
United States District Court
Page 4 of 4
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?