Collins v. Myers
2:19-cv-01486
W.D. La.Dec 17, 2019Background
- Petitioner Daniel Wayne Collins, a federal inmate at FCI Oakdale, filed a pro se § 2241 habeas petition seeking recalculation of his sentence/good-conduct-time under the First Step Act to advance his projected release date.
- Collins asserts recalculation would move his release from August 2, 2021 to March 22, 2021, affecting eligibility for halfway house placement (as early as March 22, 2020).
- Collins admits he did not exhaust BOP administrative remedies and contends he lacks time to fully litigate administratively.
- The BOP has exclusive authority to compute sentence credit and to correct any miscalculation through its administrative process.
- The Magistrate Judge reviewed the petition under the § 2254 rules (Rule 4 screening) and recommended denial and dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Collins may obtain § 2241 relief now for BOP sentence-credit recalculation | Collins seeks immediate recalculation under the First Step Act; says time is short | BOP has not made a final administrative decision; petitioner must exhaust BOP remedies first | Petition dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies |
| Whether exhaustion exceptions excuse Collins' failure to pursue BOP remedies | Collins claims exigency (not enough time) | Exceptions apply only in extraordinary circumstances; no such showing | No extraordinary circumstances shown; exhaustion required |
| Whether the district court has jurisdiction to decide before BOP final decision | Collins seeks court review of BOP credit determination | District court lacks jurisdiction until BOP issues a final determination | Court declines to reach merits; requires BOP final action first |
Key Cases Cited
- Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448 (5th Cir. 2000) (distinguishes challenges to execution/duration of sentences under § 2241)
- United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329 (1992) (Attorney General/BOP authority to award credit under § 3585(b))
- Pierce v. Holder, 614 F.3d 158 (5th Cir. 2010) (district court jurisdiction to review BOP credit decisions only after final agency action)
- Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (2006) (exhaustion requires proper compliance with administrative procedures)
- Smith v. Thompson, 937 F.2d 217 (5th Cir. 1991) (agency should be given opportunity to correct its own error before judicial intervention)
- Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (standard for timely objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation)
- Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007) (PLRA exhaustion as an affirmative defense; PLRA does not bar sua sponte dismissal of federal habeas for failure to exhaust)