Opinion
CV 23-04234-KS
07-24-2024
Denico Lynde Dudley McSweeny v. Federal Correctional Institution Lompoc et al.
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Karen L. Stevenson, Chief United States Magistrate Judge
Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL
On May 25, 2023, Petitioner, proceeding pro se and, at that time, an inmate in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), filed the pending Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Petition”). (Dkt. No. 1.) hi the Petition, Petitioner contends that he was improperly found ineligible to receive First Step Act sentence credits, and that those credits were stripped from his release date calculation. (Id. at 3.) As a result, Petitioner argues he is being held past his release date of March 26, 2023. (Id. at 4.) Petitioner requests that the Court order the BOP “to apply the credit due under the law.” (Id.)
However, on October 11, 2023, Petitioner filed a notice of change of address with the Court, and his new address appears to be a residence. (Dkt. No. 19.) Additionally, a review of the publicly-available information on the official BOP website indicates that Petitioner was released from custody on October 13, 2023. Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator, http://www.bop.gov/inmateloc (last visited on July 23, 2024).
Because Petitioner has now been released from BOP custody, it appears that “the relief sought in the Petition is moot, and no further relief remains to be granted in this case.” Sila v. Warden, No. EDCV 22-1632 RSWL (AS), 2023 WL 2504476, *2 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2023). Further, to the extent Petitioner would seek any other remedy from the application of First Step Act credits such as an early termination of supervised release, the First Step Act “does not provide for a reduction of supervised release terms, and the BOP is not authorized to reduce such terms.” Id. (collecting cases).
Therefore, as it appears no further relief can be provided here, the Court must dismiss this action as moot. Id. (citing Burnett v. Lampert, 432 F.3d 996, 1000-01 (9th Cir. 2005)).
In light of the foregoing, Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, on or before August 23, 2024, why the Court should not dismiss this action with prejudice. To discharge this Order to Show Cause, Petitioner must submit a response of no more than five pages showing that that the continued pursuit of this case would or could lead to any relief now that Petitioner has been released from custody.
Petitioner is warned that the failure to timely respond to this Order to Show Cause WILL result in the Court entering judgment dismissing this action with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.