3:15-cv-00102
S.D. Ga.Jan 15, 2016Background
- Petitioner Jairo Rafael Sanz de la Rosa is a federal inmate at McRae Correctional Facility who challenges the Bureau of Prisons’ (BOP) calculation of his good conduct time (GCT) under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
- Sanz was sentenced in the Southern District of Florida in 2006 to 188 months for cocaine offenses; his term was later reduced to 151 months via guideline amendments.
- BOP computed a projected release date of November 15, 2016, crediting Sanz with 239 days of pretrial jail credit, 540 days of GCT, and a prorated 52 days for the final portion of the sentence.
- Sanz contends the BOP improperly calculated GCT based on time served rather than the length of the imposed sentence and asks the court to adopt the Barber dissent’s approach to GCT calculation.
- Respondent (Warden Stone) submitted records showing the BOP applied the GCT methodology approved by the Supreme Court in Barber v. Thomas; the magistrate judge recommended denial of the petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper method to compute GCT under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b) | Sanz: GCT should be calculated based on the length of the imposed sentence (adopting Barber dissent) | Stone: BOP applied the statutory/regulatory method approved by Barber majority | Court: BOP’s calculation method is correct and binding; petition denied |
| Whether BOP applied credits correctly to Sanz’s release date | Sanz: BOP’s numeric computation undercounts his GCT | Stone: Records show BOP awarded jail credit and prorated GCT per its rules | Court: Administrative record supports BOP’s computation; no entitlement to relief |
| Whether petitioner may obtain relief under § 2241 | Sanz: seeks habeas relief to correct calculation | Stone: calculation followed statutes, regulations, and program statements; Barber controls | Court: No constitutional/statutory violation shown; § 2241 relief denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Barber v. Thomas, 560 U.S. 474 (2010) (approves BOP’s method of awarding good conduct time under § 3624(b))
- United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329 (1992) (Attorney General/BOP authority over imprisonment and credit calculations)
- Brown v. McFadden, 416 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 2005) (Eleventh Circuit approval of BOP good-conduct-time interpretation)
- United States v. Lucas, 898 F.2d 1554 (11th Cir. 1990) (BOP authority discussed)
- McGinley v. Houston, 361 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2004) (stare decisis binding effect of circuit decisions)