United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division
T'MICHAEL JONES REG. # 062610-019
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
D. CAIN, JR. JUDGE.
KATHLEEN KAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
the court is a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by pro se petitioner
T'Michael Jones on October 16, 2019 [doc. 1] and a Motion
for Relief and Immediate Release from Custody filed on
November 18, 2019 [doc. 4]. Jones is an inmate in the custody
of the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) and is currently
incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Center at Oakdale,
Louisiana (“FCIO”). This matter has been referred
to the undersigned for review, report, and recommendation in
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the standing orders
of this Court.
is currently serving a sentenced imposed on September 30,
2011, by the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, in docket numbers
1:11-CR-00218-TWT-03 and 1:11-CR-0439. Doc. 1, p. 1, ¶
4. He contends that in November 2015, he was informed by his
Unit Team at FPC-Atlanta that he received a 27-month
reduction in his sentence pursuant to Amendment 782, but
three years later, he was informed that they “made a
mistake.” Doc. 1, p. 7.
Screening of Habeas Corpus Petitions
district court may apply any or all of the rules governing
habeas petitions filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to those
filed under § 2241. See Rule 1(b), Rules
Governing § 2254 Cases in the United States District
Courts. Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases
authorizes preliminary review of such petitions, and states
that they must be summarily dismissed “[i]f it plainly
appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the
petitioner is not entitled to relief.” Id. at
Rule 4. To avoid summary dismissal under Rule 4, the petition
must contain factual allegations pointing to a “real
possibility of constitutional error.” Id. at
Rule 4, advisory committee note (quoting Aubut v.
Maine, 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st Cir. 1970)). Accordingly,
we review the pleadings and exhibits before us to determine
whether any right to relief is indicated, or whether the
petition must be dismissed.
§ 2241 petition on behalf of a sentenced prisoner
“attacks the manner in which a sentence is carried out
or the prison authorities' determination of its
duration.” Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451
(5th Cir. 2000). In order to prevail, a § 2241
petitioner must show that he is “in custody in
violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the
United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3).
initial issue that must be addressed is whether petitioner is
required to exhaust administrative remedies. Generally, a
federal prisoner must exhaust his administrative remedies
before seeking habeas relief in federal court under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241. Skinner v. Wiley, 355 F.3d 1293, 1295
(11th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 124 S.Ct. 2112
(2004); Fuller v. Rich, 11 F.3d 61, 62 (5th Cir.
1994); see also Rourke v. Thompson, 11 F.3d 47, 49
(5th Cir. 1993). Exceptions to the exhaustion requirement
apply only in "extraordinary circumstances" and the
petitioner bears the burden of ...