Stammers, Scott v. Emmerich, Warden
3:25-cv-00260
| W.D. Wis. | Jun 30, 2025Background
- Scott Stammers, a federal inmate at FCI Oxford, is serving a 181-month sentence for federal drug offenses.
- Stammers filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging the BOP’s calculation of his sentence.
- He argues that ICE’s detainer and a final removal order prevent him from receiving statutory earned time credits under the First Step Act (FSA) for early release.
- Stammers admits he did not exhaust BOP administrative remedies before petitioning the court.
- DHS records confirm a final order of removal is in place against Stammers, making him ineligible for early release based on FSA credits.
- The district court denied the petition, finding he is not entitled to have his FSA credits applied toward an earlier release or transfer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff’s Argument | Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application of FSA Time Credits with ICE Detainer | Stammers claims the BOP wrongly denied application of his FSA credits due to an ICE detainer, which should allow for earlier release or transfer to ICE custody. | The BOP argues that a final order of removal under immigration laws statutorily bars the application of FSA time credits toward early release. | The court finds statutory language prohibits application of FSA credits if a final order of removal exists. |
| Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies | Stammers concedes he did not exhaust BOP administrative remedies before filing his petition. | N/A (court finds exhaustion not dispositive in this case) | The court declines to reach the exhaustion issue because Stammers is ineligible for FSA credits regardless. |
| Entitlement to Habeas Relief | Stammers argues sentence is incorrectly calculated and seeks habeas relief. | Respondent contends sentence is properly calculated per statute and regulations. | The petition is denied; sentence is not calculated incorrectly under the relevant law. |
| Effect of Final Order of Removal on Sentence Credits | Stammers seeks application of FSA credits despite removal order. | BOP emphasizes statutory and regulatory bars to credits where removal order exists. | Statute and regulations control; no credits applied with final removal order. |
Key Cases Cited
- Valona v. United States, 138 F.3d 693 (7th Cir. 1998) (holding § 2241 petitions can challenge execution, not validity, of sentence)
- Richmond v. Scibana, 387 F.3d 602 (7th Cir. 2004) (reaffirming requirement to exhaust administrative remedies in § 2241 actions)
- Clemente v. Allen, 120 F.3d 703 (7th Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (habeas corpus review of sentence computation requires exhaustion of administrative remedies)