Al-Marri v. Davis
714 F.3d 1183
10th Cir.2013Background
- Al-Marri, a federal inmate, was arrested in 2001 as a material witness to 9/11 and held first in Peoria County Jail, then MCC in New York.
- He faced charges later dismissed for improper venue and reindicted in Illinois; transferred back to Peoria for detention.
- In 2003, Bush designated him an enemy combatant and he was transferred to DoD custody, with the Illinois district court dismissing the indictment.
- He was detained at the Naval Brig in Charleston for over five years as an enemy combatant; Fourth Circuit deemed detention unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court vacated as moot after transfer back to civilian custody.
- In 2009 he was indicted on providing material support to a terrorist organization; in 2009 pleaded guilty to one count; sentencing range was 292–360 months, statutory max 180 months.
- The district court sentenced him to 100 months after reducing the maximum by 71 months (the time he was held as a material witness/enemy combatant) and an additional 9 months for confinement conditions; BOP credited 745 days of pretrial detention but denied prior custody credit for the 71 months and did not grant Good Conduct Time (GCT) for that period; al-Marri challenged the GCT calculation in a 2241 petition, which the district court denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 71 months as material witness/enemy combatant qualifies for prior custody credit under §3585(b) and triggers GCT under §3624(b). | al-Marri argues the 71 months are prior custody under §3585(b) and thus count toward GCT. | BOP argues those 71 months are not “official detention” under §3585(b) and not part of the term of imprisonment defined by §3585; Barber/proper interpretation favors BOP. | Foreclosed: Wilson controls; time was not creditable under §3585(b) and not part of the term of imprisonment for GCT. |
| Whether time spent as enemy combatant can be treated as “time served” within the meaning of §3624(b). | argues time served as enemy combatant should count toward GCT. | BOP reads GCT to apply only to time served under the federal sentence defined by §3585. | Rejected; the majority defers to BOP’s natural interpretation that GCT applies to time under the sentence defined by §3585. |
| Whether equitable relief could order a GCT calculation contrary to the BOP’s statutory duty. | requests equitable relief to award GCT for unlawful detention. | district court acted within discretion in declining to override statutory scheme; no abuse of discretion. | Affirmed; district court did not abuse discretion; no authority to order contrary to statutory duty; BOP calculation upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329 (1992) (sentencing court cannot grant §3585(b) credit; only BOP may)
- United States v. Jenkins, 38 F.3d 1143 (1994) (recognizes Wilson-derived rule in 10th Cir.)
- United States v. Peters, 470 F.3d 907 (2006) (BOP authority for credit issues; Ninth Cir.)
- Barber v. Thomas, 130 S. Ct. 2499 (2010) (time served vs. term of imprisonment; defer to BOP’s calculation)
- Lopez v. Terrell, 654 F.3d 176 (2011) (GCT reading aligns with BOP interpretation; presentence custody not part of sentence under GCT)
- Schleining v. Thomas, 642 F.3d 1242 (2011) (same rationale as Lopez on GCT interpretation)
- Izzo v. Wiley, 620 F.3d 1257 (2010) (tenor of agency interpretation persuasive)
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (1944) (persuasive deference standard for informal agency interpretations)