Aquino v. Unknown

Filing 4

OPINION. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 3/6/2017. (slt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
WILFREDO AQUINO,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN, USP LEE,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 7:16CV00589
OPINION
By: James P. Jones
United States District Judge

Wilfredo Aquino, Pro Se Petitioner; Sara Bugbee Winn, Assistant United
States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Respondent.
The petitioner, a federal inmate, filed this action as a Petition for a Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, seeking a retroactive designation
allowing his federal sentence to run concurrently to his state sentence. Because
Aquino was recently granted this relief, I conclude that his § 2241 petition must be
dismissed without prejudice as moot.
On November 13, 2009, Aquino 1 was arrested by local authorities in New
Jersey for drug offenses.

While he was in state custody, federal authorities

“borrowed” him several times on a federal writ for proceedings related to a federal
charge of illegal reentry. Aquino was sentenced on January 19, 2011, to an 84month term of imprisonment on the federal charge and returned to state authorities.
1

Flores.

Documentation now in the record indicates that Aquino is also known as Carlo

On January 28, 2011, the state court imposed a sentence of ten years in prison to
run concurrent to the federal sentence.
Aquino was granted parole from his state sentence on July 13, 2015, and was
released to federal authorities. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) calculated
Aquino’s federal sentence as commencing on July 13, 2015. Aquino requested a
retroactive designation — to calculate his federal sentence as commencing on the
date it was imposed and to grant concurrent credit on his federal sentence for the
time he had served in state custody. The BOP denied this request in June 2016.
Aquino filed this § 2241 petition in December 2016, seeking retroactive
designation of January 19, 2011, as the start date of the federal sentence. The
respondent has filed a response, contending that Aquino’s § 2241 petition is moot,
because he has received the desired adjustment to his federal sentence.
The respondent’s documentation verifies that on February 9, 2017, after
reconsideration of Aquino’s request, the BOP determined under the factors in 18
U.S.C. § 3621(b) that a retroactive designation was appropriate. Accordingly,
Aquino’s federal sentence was adjusted and deemed to have commenced on
January 19, 2011, the date that the sentence was imposed. The federal term of

-2-

confinement was then recalculated to include credit for time served the concurrent
state sentence.2
“[A] case is moot when the issues presented are no longer live or the parties
lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” United States v. Hardy, 545
F.3d 280, 283 (4th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted); Incumaa v. Ozmint, 507 F.3d 281,
287 (4th Cir. 2007) (finding case moot if petitioner “has no further need” for the
requested relief). A court may address the issue of mootness sua sponte, “since
mootness goes to the heart of the Article III jurisdiction of the courts” to address
only live controversies. Friedman’s, Inc. v. Dunlap, 290 F.3d 191, 197 (4th Cir.
2002) (citation omitted).
Because I conclude that Aquino has received the only relief he requested in
his § 2241 petition, the parties no longer have any live controversy for the court to
adjudicate, and the petition must be dismissed as moot.
A separate Order will be entered herewith.
.

DATED:

March 6, 2017

/s/ James P. Jones
United States District Judge

2

Aquino’s current projected release date is now March 31, 2017. At that time, he
will be released to Immigration and Custom Enforcement officials based on a detainer
lodged with these authorities.
-3-