USA v. Walton

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 	PLAINTIFF
v. 	CASE NO. 5:19-CR-50069
AARON WALTON 	DEFENDANT
ORDER
Now pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc.
62) of United States Magistrate Judge Christy Comstock, filed on January 5, 2026.
Defendant was sentenced in this Court to 151 months of imprisonment for distribution of
more than 5 grams of actual methamphetamine. He appeared in federal court on a writ
because he was in the primary custody of the State of Arkansas at the time. He was not
returned to state custody until after he was sentenced on the federal charge. In his Motion
to Correct Judgment (Doc. 58), Defendant argues that he is entitled to 210 days of jail
credit for the time spent in federal custody prior to his sentencing. The Magistrate Judge
suspects that Defendant has not exhausted his administrative remedies with the BOP,
but even if he has, she explains that the proper procedure to obtain federal credit is to
bring a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district where he is currently incarcerated—
not the district where he was sentenced.
On February 10, 2026, Defendant filed an Objection (Doc. 65) to the R&R, which
triggered this Court’s de novo review of the record. Defendant asserts in his Objection
that his federal prosecution effectively caused him “to lose Arkansas credits, and thus
spend roughly an extra year in jail.” Id. at p. 4. He believes this Court should have made
“an adjustment for the fact that Walton’s federal charges had the direct effect of extending
Case 5:19-cr-50069-TLB Document 67 Filed 03/17/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
his total time in prison by 210 days.” Id. at p. 5. He also attaches proof of the fact that he
exhausted his administrative remedies with the BOP. See Doc. 65-1. However, he fails
to address the R&R’s finding that his request for credit should have been filed under
§ 2241 in the venue where he is incarcerated, the Southern District of Mississippi. The
R&R is correct; the Court lacks jurisdiction to address the Motion, and the Objection is
OVERRULED on that ground.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 62) is
ADOPTED, and Defendant’s Motion (Doc. 58) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for
lack of jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED on this 17th day of March, 2026.
/s/ Timothy L. Brooks
TIMOTHY L. BROOKS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 5:19-cr-50069-TLB Document 67 Filed 03/17/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>