Opinion
00 CR 50049-04.
December 13, 2004
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Theoplious Hempstead, a federal prisoner serving a 120-month prison sentence at a facility in Colorado, filed a "motion for clarification and stipulation motion and order," seeking a clarification from this court, a stipulation from the government, and an "agreed order" from this court pursuant to such stipulation that he is entitled to 540 days of good time credit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b) and based on his 120-month sentence as opposed to the time he will actually serve in prison. The motion does not identify in any way under what authority it is being asserted.
The government, in its response, characterizes Hempstead's motion as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and contends that it should be dismissed as this court lacks jurisdiction to consider a § 2241 petition by a prisoner housed in Colorado.
While Hempstead has not specified any particular authority for his unusual motion, it essentially seeks a stipulation from the United States Attorney's office that prosecuted his case as well as a clarification and order from the court that originally sentenced him. To that extent, this court has jurisdiction to rule on the motion.
That being said, the court denies the motion because the government has not filed a stipulation and there is no indication that Hempstead has sought administrative relief from the Bureau of Prisons prior to filing his motion in this court. Even assuming this court had jurisdiction to examine the merits of the issue essentially raised by Hempstead, the Seventh Circuit has recently held that good time credit, as determined pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b), is calculated based on time actually served as opposed to the length of the sentence itself. White v. Scibana, No. 04-2410, slip op. at 3-10 (7th Cir. Dec. 2, 2004). TheScibana case directly rejects Hempstead's contention in this case.
For the foregoing reasons, the court denies the motion for clarification and stipulation and order.