United States District Court, D. Connecticut
R. UNDERHILL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Anthony Patterson (“Patterson”) sent me a letter
requesting that I review his sentence because he alleges he
is being denied 78 days of good time credit; I treated the
letter as a habeas petition pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
2241. See Petition, Doc. No. 1. For the following
reasons, his request is denied and the petition is dismissed.
14, 2014, Patterson was sentenced to 60 months of
incarceration for unlawful possession of a firearm by a
convicted felon. See United States v. Patterson,
13-cr-7, Doc. No. 63. At the time of his arrest, Patterson
was serving a term of Special Parole with the State of
Connecticut and was held in state custody from November 13,
2012, the date of arrest, until January 13, 2015, when
Patterson was released into federal custody. The underlying
state case was nolled on August 1, 2014. Accordingly, I
amended Patterson's judgment on December 21, 2016 to
include credit for time served in state custody from August
1, 2014 to January 13, 2015. Id. at Doc. No. 73.
remaining 20 months that Patterson served in state custody,
November 13, 2012 to August 1, 2014, are the subject of his
petition. At sentencing, I took those 20 months into account
and stated: “I would have sentenced you to 80 months
but I'm going to give you 20 months for the time that
you've spent in state custody and I'm going to
sentence you to a period of incarceration of 60
months.” Id. at Doc. No. 65, Tr. at 27. I
stated further that I made the time Patterson spent in state
custody “in effect … concurrent by giving credit
for it on the federal sentence.” Id. at 31.
Patterson now alleges that he has earned 78 days of good time
credit for those 20 months in which he was in state custody,
but the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) will not credit
it toward his sentence. See Petition, Doc. No. 1. He
argues that because of the way his sentence was constructed,
60 months' incarceration rather than 80 months minus the
20 months served, the BOP will not apply the 78 days earned.
Id. Patterson included as an attachment a letter to
him from Officer Doty who stated, in response to
Patterson's request for credit, that the BOP “will
only award good time credits on the actual sentence imposed
to serve, (post-adjustment) … the 20-month downward
departure you received at sentencing, will not be credited
additionally with good conduct time (GCT) credits.”
Id. at 15. The BOP denied Patterson's request
for the 78 days of good time accrued prior to his federal
letter to me, Patterson requests that I amend the judgment in
his case to give him credit for the 78 days prior to
sentencing. Doc. No. 1. At this point, I have no authority to
change the sentence; I can only amend the judgment to conform
to the sentence actually imposed. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582 (b), (c) (judgment of conviction can be amended
only in certain circumstances such as correcting clear error
or amending a sentence based upon a guidelines range that was
subsequently reduced); United States v. Verkhoglyad,
516 F.3d 122, 134 (2d Cir. 2008) (remanding case to district
court to amend its written judgment to “memorialize its
stated reasons for sentencing.”). In addition, because
the 20-month period for which Patterson seeks good time
credits was not made part of the sentence, he is not eligible
for good time credits for that period. The statute that
governs the application of “good time credits, ”
18 U.S.C. § 3624(b) provides, in relevant part:
“[A] prisoner who is serving a term of imprisonment of
more than 1 year … may receive credit toward the
service of the prisoner's sentence … of up to 54
days at the end of each year of the prisoner's term
of imprisonment . . . [for] exemplary compliance with
institutional disciplinary regulations.” (Emphasis
added). “A sentence to a term of imprisonment commences
on the date the defendant is received in custody awaiting
transportation to, or arrives voluntarily to commence service
of sentence at, the official detention facility at which the
sentence is to be served.” 18 U.S.C. § 3585(a).
The Second Circuit has upheld the BOP's interpretation of
the good time statute to “limit the award of good
conduct time to the term of imprisonment constituting a
defendant's federal sentence as defined under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3585.” Lopez v. Terrell, 654 F.3d 176,
190 (2d Cir. 2011). Contrary to Patterson's contention,
he was sentenced to 60 months of imprisonment, not 80 months
with 20 months' credit. Although I said at sentencing
that I was taking into consideration the 20 months that he
was in state custody, the sentence itself does not include
those 20 months. Accordingly, Patterson is not entitled to
the good time credit earned within that time period.
event, I have no authority to grant Patterson's habeas
petition. Patterson is confined in New York, and any Section
2241 petition raising a sentence calculation claim must be
brought in the prisoner's district of confinement.
See Wilson v. Wells, 2017 WL 6667515, *2 (D. Conn.
Sept. 6, 2017) (section 2241 petition must be filed in
judicial district where inmate is confined because court must
have jurisdiction over inmate's custodian in order to
issue writ of habeas corpus); United States v.
Cabrera, 2017 WL 398384, *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 27, 2017)
(court lacks jurisdiction over petitioner's challenge to
BOP's calculation of sentence); United States v.
Ruby, 2010 WL 1403950, *10 (D. Vt. Feb. 2, 2010) (proper
venue for section 2241 petition is district of confinement).
the petition is dismissed and the Clerk is