Ronnie Morris v. DONNA ZICKEFOOSE, Warden, FCI Dix

DLD-137 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 10-1426
___________
RONNIE MORRIS,
Appellant
v.
DONNA ZICKEFOOSE, Warden, FCI Dix; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director,
Bureau of Prisons; ERIC HOLDER, United States Attorney General
____________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey
(D.C. Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-00307)
District Judge: Honorable Noel L. Hillman
____________________________________
Submitted for Possible Summary Action
Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
March 4, 2010
Before: FUENTES, JORDAN and HARDIMAN, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: March 9, 2010)
_________
OPINION
_________
PER CURIAM
Appellant Ronnie Morris seeks review of a final order by the United States District
Court for the District of New Jersey entered on January 29, 2010, denying his petition for

-- 1 of 4 --

Ordinarily, we require federal prisoners to exhaust administrative remedies prior to1
seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Moscato v. Fed.
Bureau of Prisons, 98 F.3d 757, 760 (3d Cir. 1996). Morris alleges that the BOP did not
respond to his attempts to exhaust his administrative remedies and further efforts would
be futile because his claim will become moot by his May 15, 2010, release date. The
District Court implicitly accepted Morris’s arguments and reached the merits of his
petition.
2
a writ of habeas corpus. Because the appeal does not present a substantial question, we
will summarily affirm the District Court’s judgment. See 3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; I.O.P.
10.6.
I. Background
On August 19, 2009, the United States District Court for the Western District of
New York sentenced Morris to a term of 12 months of imprisonment for two supervised
release violations. His projected release date is May 15, 2010.
On January 20, 2010, Morris, who is incarcerated in New Jersey, filed an
“emergency writ of mandamus” in the United States District Court for the District of New
Jersey. In it, Morris claims that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) erroneously calculated his
sentence. The District Court construed Morris’s submission as a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus and summarily denied the petition as meritless.1
Morris filed a timely pro se notice of appeal. He has moved to expedite the appeal.
II. Analysis
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We
exercise plenary review over the District Court’s denial of the petition for a writ of habeas

-- 2 of 4 --

Pursuant to § 3585(b)(1), a defendant “shall be given credit toward the service of a2
term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the
sentence commences . . . as a result of the offense for which the sentence was imposed.”
3
corpus. See Woodall v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 432 F.3d 235, 239 n.3 (3d Cir. 2005).
We review the District Court’s factual findings for clear error. See Vega v. United States,
493 F.3d 310, 314 (3d Cir. 2007). We may summarily affirm if the appeal presents no
substantial question. See 3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; I.O.P. 10.6.
Morris claims the BOP erroneously computed his sentence by failing to award him
credit for a 36-day period of detention from August 19, 2009, through September 23,
2009. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b)(1). We have held that § 2241 provides the proper vehicle2
for a federal prisoner to challenge the “execution” of his sentence, including a challenge to
his sentencing computation. See Woodall, 432 F.3d at 242; Coady v. Vaughn, 251 F.3d
480, 485 (3d Cir. 2001). Accordingly, the District Court properly construed the claim as a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Based upon the BOP’s Sentence Monitoring Computation Data sheet, which Morris
appended to his petition, the District Court found that the BOP awarded Morris credit
pursuant to § 3585(b) for a period of detention from September 23, 2008, through
November 20, 2008 (59 days) and for a period of detention from July 14, 2009, through
August 18, 2009 (36 days). The District Court found that Morris commenced serving his
12-month sentence on August 19, 2009.
With regard to the disputed period from August 19, 2009, through September 23,

-- 3 of 4 --

4
2009, the District Court found that “the BOP in fact gave Petitioner credit against his
sentence for this period, insofar as the BOP calculates the 12-month sentence as
commencing on August 19, 2009, the day it was imposed.” Having closely reviewed the
record, we conclude that the District Court’s finding is not clearly erroneous. The District
Court then correctly determined that Morris cannot be credited a second time for that
period. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b); see also United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 337
(1992) (stating that Congress made clear in § 3585(b) that a prisoner can “not receive a
double credit for his detention time.”). Accordingly, we conclude that the District Court
properly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
III. Conclusion
Because there is no substantial question to be presented on appeal, we will
summarily affirm the District Court’s judgment. See 3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; I.O.P. 10.6. We
deny as moot the motion to expedite the appeal.

-- 4 of 4 --