Winston v. Stansberry

Filing 21

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 9/25/11. Copy sent: Yes(tdai, )

IN THE

UNITED

STATES DISTRICT

COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
MONTE DECARLOS WINSTON,

Petitioner,

v.

Civil

PATRICIA R.

Action No.

3:10CV631

STANSBERRY,

Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Monte

DeCarlos

Winston,

brings this petition

2010,

the

Court

challenged
and

Order

U.S.C.

the

execution
on

at

a

*3

28

of

July

§ 2241 petition.

2011 WL 2693383,

federal

inmate

for a writ of habeas

received

entered

a

U.S.C.

his
11,

§

2241

Va.

se,

in which

1,

he

Memorandum Opinion

Court

dismissed

Stansberrv,

July 11,

pro

On September

petition
By

the

See Winston v.
(E.D.

corpus.

sentence.
2011,

proceeding

2011).

No.

the

28

3:10CV631,

The Court

found

that "Winston's Present § 2241 Petition constitutes an abuse of the
writ

in that

the

Court has

rejected his

claim that

he

is

entitled

to additional credit against his federal sentence for time spent in
custody prior to the imposition of his

Willis

credit."

Id.

motion

seeking

relief

Procedure

"[R]©consideration
extraordinary

Co.

v.

Am.

remedy

Nat'l

from

of

which

Fire

that

a

decision

judgment

should

Ins.

before

Co.,

be

Court

under

after

used

148

the

including

59(e).

Civil

The matter is

federal sentence,

on Winston's

Federal

its

entry

sparingly."

F.3d

396,

403

Rule

is

of

an

Pac.

Ins.

(4th

Cir.

1998)(internal quotation marks omitted).

Relief under Rule 59(e)

is

intervening

appropriate

controlling

trial;

or

law;

(3)

to

injustice."
1993)

"(1)
(2)

to
to

(D.

625,

626

correct

Hutchinson

Md.

1991);

a

v.

(S.D.

Miss.

demonstrate

1990)).

that

error of

Staton.

v.

an

for new evidence not

clear

Atkins

is warranted under the

that

account

(citing Weyerhaeuser Corp.

1419

to

accommodate

v.

994

available

F.2d

1076,

1081

771 F.

Winston's

at

Cir.
1406,

130

F.R.D.

Winston suggests that reconsideration

Court

Rule

(4th

Supp.

Marathon LeTourneau Co.,

Nevertheless,

committed

a

clear

Winston

error

reconsideration is necessary to prevent manifest

Accordingly,

in

law or prevent manifest

Koppers Co.,

third ground.

the

change

59(e)

motion

(Docket

of

fails

law

or

injustice.

No.

18)

will

be

DENIED.

The
Opinion

An

Clerk
to

is

Winston

appropriate

DIRECTED
and

to

counsel

Order

send
of

shall

a

copy

Date: ^Z>Wfr^> ^
Virginia

this

Memorandum

record.

issue.

Robert

Richmond,

of

E.

Payne

Senior

United

States

LtP
District

Judge