Opinion
03 Civ. 2266 (RPP) 99 Cr.
December 11, 2003
David Cooper, New York, NY, for Defendant
James B. Comey, Michael Scudder, Jr., New York, NY, for Defendant
OPINION AND ORDER
On January 6, 2003 Reginaldo Gomez-Peralta (Petitioner) filed a motion requesting a writ of mandamus to compel his re-sentencing based on an alleged error in failure to credit him with time served.
The Court's records show that Mr. Gomez-Peralta was arrested in New York City on October 5, 1998 (Aff. of Reginaldo Gomez-Peralta of Dec. 6, 2002 [hereinafter Affidavit] at 7, 12.) and sentenced to thirteen months' imprisonment for a parole violation (id. at 9.). Over one year — but less than thirteen months — later on October 20, 1999, Petitioner was taken from New York State custody, and transported to federal custody at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) pursuant to a federal writ. (id. at 7.) While in custody at the MCC, Petitioner pled guilty to a federal charge of illegal re-entry, 18 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) (b)(2), and was sentenced to 48 months' imprisonment. On October 19, 2000, Petitioner was transferred from federal custody to state custody to serve the remainder of the state sentence. (Affidavit at 7.) On October 26, 2000, Mr. Gomez-Peralta was transferred to federal custody. (id. at 6.)
Petitioner has exhausted his administrative remedies for his claim of mis-calculation of his time served. On December 11, 2001, he filed an "Inmate Request to a Staff Member." On December 14, 2001, he received a response from James Cochran, Inmate Systems Manager, stating that he had received documentation from the New York State Department of Corrections which, "reflects the violation term was served un-interrupted during the period inmate Gomez-Peralta was produced on Federal Writ, and the "parole" discharge to federal authorities effective October 26, 2000." (id. at 7 (emphasis in original).) However, the Parole Revocation Decision Notice, included as an exhibit by the Petitioner in his motion, shows that Petitioner was sentenced to thirteen months on his parole violation. (Id. at 13.) The Notice also states that Petitioner's "delinquency date" was October 5, 1998. (Id. at 12.) The time from October 5, 1998 (when Petitioner was first arrested) to October 26, 2000 (when Petitioner's federal sentence has been computed as beginning) is well over the thirteen months to which Petitioner was sentenced for his parole violation.
Petitioner appealed this decision by James Cochran by filing a "Request for Administrative Remedy" dated January 2, 2002, which was denied. (Id. at 15.) Next, Petitioner filed a Regional Administrative Remedy Appeal, which was also denied. (Id. at 17.) Petitioner filed this writ of Mandamus in response to the May 16, 2002 denial of his Central Office Administrative Remedy Appeal. (Id. at 19-20.)
"A defendant shall be given credit towards the term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the sentence commences . . . as a result of the offense for which the sentence was imposed." 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). Thus, it would appear the Petitioner should receive credit for the time he spent in federal custody from October 1999 to October 2000. However, this determination is for the Bureau of Prisons, and not the Court, to make. United States v. Wilson, 112 S.Ct. 1351, 1354 (1992) (holding that 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) does not authorize a District Court to compute time served credit at sentencing); United States v. Luna-Reynoso, 258 F.3d 111, 117 (2d Cir. 2001); United States v. Montez-Gaviria, 163 F.3d 697, 700-01 (2d Cir. 1998) ("The Bureau of Prisons, and not the courts, determines when a defendant's "sentence starts and whether the defendant should receive credit for any prior time spent in custody.").
As the Court has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus in this case, the Petitioner's order is denied. However, the Court has written a letter to the Bureau of Prisons clarifying the Court's understanding that the state did not credit the twelve months that Petitioner spent in pre-trial custody at the MCC towards his New York State parole violation, and accordingly suggesting that Mr. Gomez-Peralta should be credited for the time he served in the MCC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE 500 PEARL STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 10007
CHAMBERS OF ROBERT P. PATTERSON, JR. DISTRICT JUDGE
December 11, 2003 Stephen L. Morgan Regional Inmate Systems Administrator Federal Bureau of Prisons Northeast Regional Office U.S. Custom House 2nd and Chestnut Streets Philadelphia, PA 19106
Re: Reginaldo Gomez-Peralta Federal Register Number: 48347-054 Case Number: 1:99CR00895-001 (RPP)
Dear Mr. Morgan:
I am writing in response to your letter of May 1999, to AUSA Steve Kobre, in order to clarify the Court's intent at the time of sentencing with respect to the sentence of the above-named inmate.
The Court's records show that Mr. Gomez-Peralta was arrested in New York City on October 5, 1998, and sentenced to 13 months' imprisonment for a parole violation. Over one year later, but less than 13 months later, on October 20, 1999, Reginaldo Gomez-Peralta was taken from New York State custody, and transported to federal custody at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) pursuant to a federal writ. While in custody at the MCC, he pled guilty to a federal charge of illegal re-entry, 18 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) (b)(2), and was sentenced to 48 months' imprisonment. On October 19, 2000, Mr. Gomez-Peralta was transferred from federal custody to state custody to serve the remainder of the state sentence. On October 26, 2000, having completed his state sentence for the parole violation, Mr. Gomez-Peralta was transferred to federal custody.
It is my understanding that the state courts did not credit the twelve months that Mr. Gomez-Peralta spent in federal pre-trial custody at the MCC (from October 22, 1999 to October 19, 2000) towards his sentence for the New York State parole violation. According to 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), "A defendant shall be given credit towards the term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the sentence commences . . . as a result of the offense for which the sentence was imposed." Accordingly, in computing the time served on his federal sentence, Mr. Gomez-Peralta should be credited for the time he served at the MCC in 1999 and 2000
Yours sincerely,
Robert P. Patterson, Jr.
cc: Michael Scudder, AUSA David Cooper, Attorney for Defendant Reginaldo Gomez-Peralta