Wilson, Kyle v. Emmerich, Warden

Filing 14

ORDER denying as moot Kyle Othello Wilson's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (dkt. ## 1 , 5 ). Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 10/24/2024. (lam),(ps)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN KYLE OTHELLO WILSON, Petitioner, v. OPINION and ORDER 24-cv-352-jdp WARDEN EMMERICH, Respondent. Petitioner Kyle Othello Wilson, proceeding without counsel, seeks relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Dkt. 1 and Dkt. 5. Wilson contends that he is entitled to sentence credit under the First Step Act that would entitle him to transfer to home confinement or a Residential Reentry Center (RRC) in September 2024 but that the BOP refuses to apply those credits, in part because it has incorrectly categorized him with a medium risk of recidivism. In response, the government states that after Wilson filed a supplement to his petition raising his argument about being incorrectly categorized with a medium risk of recidivism, the Bureau of Prisons recalculated his PATTERN risk assessment score. That recalculation resulted in Wilson receiving a “low” risk assessment score. His First Step Act credits were applied toward placement in an RRC in September 2024 and my review of the BOP’s inmate locator shows that he was indeed moved to an RRC.1 Wilson did not file a reply brief. Because the BOP has given Wilson the relief that he sought, I will deny his habeas petition as moot. 1 See https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner Kyle Othello Wilson’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Dkt. 1 and Dkt. 5, is DENIED as moot. 2. The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment and close this case. Entered October 24, 2024. BY THE COURT: /s/ ________________________________________ JAMES D. PETERSON 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?