Lee v. Sanders
Filing
36
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioners Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED. A separate judgment in accordance with this Opinion, Memorandum and Order is entered this same date.. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/12/2018. (AAS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER J. LEE,
Petitioner,
v.
LINDA SANDERS,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:17CV2911 HEA
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Application for Relief Pursuant to Title 28,
United States Code, Section 2241, [Doc. No. 1] and his Motion for Ruling, [Doc. No. 35].,
Background
Petitioner was sentenced to thirty-five (35) months’ imprisonment by the undersigned on
May 9, 2016, in United States v. Lee, 4:06CR131 HEA, for violating the terms of his supervised
release. The Judgment in petitioner’s criminal case stated that petitioner’s imprisonment, “shall
run concurrently to the sentence imposed under Docket Number 4:16CR00120 RLW.”
Petitioner was sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of fifty-seven (57) months’ by
the Honorable Ronnie L. White on August 30, 2016, in 4:16CR120 RLW. The Judgment in
petitioner’s criminal case in front of Judge White stated that petitioner’s imprisonment, “shall
run consecutive to the sentence imposed in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, St.
Louis, Missouri, under Docket No. 4:06CR00131-1 HEA.”
At the time of sentencing in the undersigned’s case, the Court stated on the record that
Judge White’s sentence was up to Judge White. Judge White was clearly aware of the previous
sentence in this case and sentenced Petitioner to fifty seven months to be run consecutively to
this Court’s sentence.
In consideration of the timing of both sentences, the Bureau of Prison’s
interpretation that Petitioner’s sentence in this case is to be served consecutively to Judge
White’s sentence is a reasonable interpretation of the sentences imposed.
\Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED.
A separate judgment in accordance with this Opinion, Memorandum and Order is entered
this same date.
Dated this 12th day of October, 2018.
___________________________________
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?