Willis has appealed from the District Court's denial of his petition to obtain credit on his federal prison sentence for certain time spent in custody prior to sentencing. We affirm in part and reverse in part, and remand the cause for a hearing.

It is appropriate to dispose of this pro se case summarily, pursuant to this Court's local Rule 9(c)(2), appellant having failed to file a brief within the time fixed by Rule 31, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Kimbrough v. Beto, Director, 5 Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 981.

On authority of 18 U.S.C.A. § 3568 as amended in 1966; see United States v. Morgan, 5 Cir. 1970, 425 F.2d 1388.

Willis alleges that while he was free on bail on the federal charge, he was arrested on October 31, 1968, by Georgia state authorities. He avers that his federal bail then was revoked and bail on the state charges was precluded by the lodging of a federal detainer against him.

Willis was sentenced on the state charges on December 10, 1968, to serve a sentence running concurrently with the federal sentence which he had received on November 29, 1968. He was transferred to the United States Penitentiary to commence service of his federal (and concurrent state) sentence on December 31, 1968. Willis claims that he is entitled to credit on his federal sentence for the 61 days from October 31 to December 31, 1968.

The appellant's official "commitment and diagnostic summary" sheet prepared by the Bureau of Prisons shows that he is credited with service of his federal sentence from December 30, 1968, but that he has been accorded no credit thereon for any presentence time.

Clearly Willis is not entitled to credit for the period of December 10 to December 30 or 31, 1968. During that time he was actually serving his state sentence for offenses unrelated to the federal charges. Sanders v. McGuire, 5 Cir. 1968, 405 F.2d 881.

The state court purported to give Willis credit for his presentence custody from October 31 to December 10, 1968. This did not help Willis, however, because his federal sentence is due to expire more than a year after his state terms.

In previous proceedings, the District Court denied relief to Willis because the sentences being concurrent, the state already had given credit for the presentence jail time. The instant petition was denied as being a successive application for similar relief. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244.

This case is governed by our decision in Davis v. Attorney General, 5 Cir. 1970, 425 F.2d 238. There we held that if Davis "was denied release on bail because the federal detainer was lodged against him, then that was time `spent in custody in connection with the [federal] offense,' [18 U.S.C.A. § 3568] since the detainer was issued upon authority of the appellant's federal conviction and sentence." 425 F.2d at 240.

Accordingly the judgment of the District Court is affirmed in part and reversed in part; and the case is remanded for an evidentiary hearing on Willis' contention that he should be accorded credit on his federal sentence for his presentence custody of October 31 to December 10, 1968.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.

Summaries of

Willis v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Feb 10, 1971

438 F.2d 923 (5th Cir. 1971)

holding that federal prisoner may receive sentence credit for time spent in presentence custody

Summary of this case from Barnes v. Masters

holding that defendant was not entitled to credit for time he was actually serving on his state sentence for offenses unrelated to his federal charge

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Wetmore

holding credit can apply to state and federal sentences if served concurrently and state credit does not benefit inmate

Summary of this case from Butler v. O'Brien

holding credit can apply to state and federal sentences if served concurrently and state credit does not benefit inmate

Summary of this case from Robinson v. O'Brien

In Willis v. United States, 438 F.2d 923 (5th Cir. 1971), the Fifth Circuit recognized an exception to § 3585(b)'s prohibition on double-counting pre-sentence credit.

Summary of this case from Walker v. Boulet

reasoning that even though the State gave petitioner credit for his presentence custody, petitioner did not receive a benefit because his State sentence expired before his federal sentence

Summary of this case from Farrow v. Andrews

reasoning that even though the State gave petitioner credit for his presentence custody, petitioner did not receive a benefit because his State sentence expired before his federal sentence

Summary of this case from Farrow v. Andrews

reasoning that even though the State gave petitioner credit for his presentence custody, petitioner did not receive a benefit because his State sentence expired before his federal sentence

Summary of this case from Frazier v. Wilson

In Willis, the Fifth Circuit indicated that if a state prisoner could demonstrate that he was denied release on bail due to a federal detainer, then that prisoner was entitled to credit against his federal sentence because his time in custody was spent "in connection with" a federal offense.

Summary of this case from Hayes v. Quintana

considering whether the defendant had spent time in state custody only because he was subject to a federal detainer

Summary of this case from Gardner v. Shartle

In Willis, the Fifth Circuit held that a state prisoner who could demonstrate that he was denied release on bail because of a federal detainer was entitled to credit against his federal sentence because that time was "spent in custody in connection with the (federal) offense."

Summary of this case from Woodson v. Salinas

In Willis, the court found that if a petitioner was denied bail in state court due to a federal detainer, then the time spent in pre-sentencing custody was deemed to have been spent in connection with the federal offense.

Summary of this case from Apotosky v. Hanson

In Willis, decided under former 18 U.S.C. § 3568, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that where a prisoner is denied release on bail on state charges because of a federal detainer, then that is time spent in custody in connection with the federal offense, and a federal prisoner may be entitled to credit — against his federal sentence — for that time if he is serving concurrent federal and state sentences where the state sentence will expire before the federal sentence.

Summary of this case from Rush v. Shartle

In Willis, the Fifth Circuit explained that unless such credit is awarded, the prisoner will not receive credit for time spent in state custody because of the longer federal sentence.

Summary of this case from Medford v. Holland

In Willis, the Fifth Circuit was concerned that the defendant had initially spent time in state custody only because he was subject to a federal detainer and therefore should get federal credit for that time.

Summary of this case from Gravel v. Fox

In Willis, the court held that limited amount of non-federal presentence credit may bp granted if the following conditions are present: (1) the non-federal and the federal sentences are concurrent; and (2) the non-federal raw EFT is either the same or earlier than the federal raw EFT.

Summary of this case from Bannister v. Ebbert

In Willis, while being free on bail with regard to his federal charges, the petitioner was arrested by state authorities, and that state arrest caused revocation of his federal bail and filing of a federal detainer against him. That federal detainer was, in turn, the sole basis for denial of Petitioner's release on bail for the purposes of his state charges.

Summary of this case from Edwards v. Hollingsworth

In Willis, the Fifth Circuit considered how to determine pre-sentence custody credit where unrelated state and federal sentences were ordered by the State to run concurrently, and the defendant sought federal credit for time spent in state custody before he was transferred to federal prison.

Summary of this case from Williams v. Pearce

In Willis, the defendant was arrested on a federal charge first and, while out on bail, was arrested on an unrelated state charge and taken into state custody.

Summary of this case from Williams v. Pearce

In Willis v. United States, 438 F.2d 923 (5th Cir. 1971), Willis filed a § 2241 petition seeking credit on his federal sentence for time spent in state custody prior to federal sentencing.

Summary of this case from Harris v. Zickefoose

Summary of this case from Richard v. Maye

In Willis, the defendant was arrested on a federal charge first and, while out on bail, was arrested on an unrelated state charge and taken into state custody.

Summary of this case from Richard v. Maye

creating a limited exception to § 3585(b)'s prohibition of awarding pre-trial detention time toward a federal sentence that has already been awarded to another sentence

Summary of this case from Smith v. Drew

In Willis, the Court held that limited amount of non-federal presentence credit may be granted if the following conditions are present: (1) the non-federal and the federal sentences are concurrent; and (2) the non-federal raw EFT is either the same or earlier than the federal raw EFT.

Summary of this case from Santana v. Lindsay

Willis v. United States

Summary

Opinion

Willis v. United States

Willis v. United States

Case Details

Citations

Citing Cases

Willis v. United States

Summary

Opinion

Willis v. United States

Willis v. United States

Case Details

CitationsCopy Citation

Citing Cases

Citations