Arreola-Amaya v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al

Filing 56

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING 46 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. A final judgment shall be entered denying the petition. Signed by District Judge Marcia A. Crone on 3/8/23. (ljw, )

Case 9:13-cv-00213-MAC-CLS Document 56 Filed 03/08/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 327

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
JOSE SALOMON ARREOLA-AMAYA,
Petitioner,
versus
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Respondent.

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:13-CV-213

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Jose Salomon Arreola-Amaya, proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court referred this matter to a United States Magistrate
Judge for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge
submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge recommending the
petition be denied.
The court has received the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge,
along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. Petitioner filed objections to the
Report and Recommendation. The court must therefore conduct a de novo review of the
objections in light of the pleadings and the applicable law.
Petitioner was previously convicted of state and federal offenses. He sought credit towards
his federal sentence for the period beginning in May 2003, when he was arrested. The court
entered a Final Judgment denying the petition. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit affirmed the judgment in part and vacated the judgment in part. The Fifth Circuit agreed
that petitioner was not entitled to credit for the period beginning in May 2003, and ending on July
29, 2004, the date of his federal sentencing. The court also agreed petitioner was not entitled to
credit for the time period beginning when he was transferred to state custody after his federal
sentencing. The court remanded the case for a determination as to whether petitioner is entitled

Case 9:13-cv-00213-MAC-CLS Document 56 Filed 03/08/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 328

to credit from the date his federal sentence was imposed to the date he was transferred to state
custody.
Petitioner’s federal sentence was imposed on July 29, 2004, and he was transferred to state
custody on August 23, 2004. The magistrate judge concluded petitioner was not entitled to credit
towards his federal sentence for this period time because during that period of time he was in
federal custody pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum. In addition, documents
submitted by the respondent established that he received credit towards his state sentence for all
periods of time after his federal sentence was imposed.
Documents filed by the respondent show that on July 23, 2003, the State of Texas moved
to revoke petitioner’s placement on deferred adjudication and issued an alias capias warrant
providing for his arrest. At that time, Texas had primary jurisdiction over him. Petitioner’s
objections contesting this are without merit. The state warrant was executed on July 31, and
petitioner was taken to the Fort Bend County Jail.
On January 13, 2004, petitioner was transferred to federal custody pursuant to a writ of
habeas corpus ad prosequendum. He remained in federal custody pursuant to this writ through
his federal sentence date and until he was returned to state custody on August 23, 2004. Petitioner
received credit towards his state sentence for time spent in federal custody pursuant to the writ.
The magistrate judge correctly stated that so long as an inmate receives credit towards a state
sentence for time spent in federal custody pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum,
he is not entitled to also receive credit towards his federal sentence. Lopez v. Jeter, 170 F. App’x
894, 895 (5th Cir. 2006) (citing United States v. Brown, 753 F.2d 455, 456 (5th Cir. 1985)).
Petitioner’s objections to the contrary are without merit.
ORDER
Accordingly, the objections filed by petitioner (#51) to the Report and Recommendation
are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are

2

Case 9:13-cv-00213-MAC-CLS Document 56 Filed 03/08/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 329

correct, and the Report of the magistrate judge (# 46) is ADOPTED. A final judgment shall be
entered denying the petition.
SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 8th day of March, 2023.

________________________________________
MARCIA A. CRONE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3