Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01724/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01724-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Neil H. Adler
Respondent
German Duenez
Petitioner

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERMAN DUENEZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

NEIL H. ADLER, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:07-cv-01724-OWW-TAG HC

ORDER REQUIRING RESPONDENT TO FILE

A RESPONSE 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

SERVE DOCUMENTS

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On November 29, 2007, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. 1). 

Petitioner alleges that Respondent has failed to properly credit him for the period of December

19, 2001 through August 18, 2003, during which he was serving a concurrent state court sentence

for a New York conviction but was in temporary federal custody under a writ of habeas corpus

ad prosequendum. (Doc. 1, p. 3a). Petitioner asserts that Respondent's actions are in violation

of federal law. (Id. at p. 3b). 

DISCUSSION

Writ of habeas corpus relief extends to a person in custody under the authority of the

United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241. While a federal prisoner who wishes to challenge the

validity or constitutionality of his conviction must bring a petition for writ of habeas corpus

Case 1:07-cv-01724-OWW -TAG Document 6 Filed 01/22/08 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a petitioner challenging the manner, location, or conditions of that

sentence's execution must bring a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

Capaldi v. Pontesso, 135 F.3d 1122, 1123 (6th Cir. 1998); United States v. Tubwell, 37 F.3d

175, 177 (5th Cir. 1994); Kingsley v. Bureau of Prisons, 937 F.2d 26, 30 n.5 (2nd Cir. 1991);

United States v. Jalili, 925 F.2d 889, 893-94 (6th Cir. 1991); Barden v. Keohane, 921 F.2d 476,

478-79 (3rd Cir. 1991); United States v. Hutchings, 835 F.2d 185, 186-87 (8th Cir. 1987);

Brown v. United States, 610 F.2d 672, 677 (9th Cir. 1990). 

To receive relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 a petitioner in federal custody must show that

his sentence is being executed in an illegal, but not necessarily unconstitutional, manor. See,

e.g., Clark v. Floyd, 80 F.3d 371, 372, 374 (9th Cir. 1995) (contending time spent in state

custody should be credited toward federal custody); Jalili, 925 F.2d at 893-94 (asserting

petitioner should be housed at a community treatment center); Barden, 921 F.2d at 479 (arguing

Bureau of Prisons erred in determining whether petitioner could receive credit for time spent in

state custody); Tubwell, 37 F.3d 175 (alleging error in parol revocation); Hutchings, 835 F.2d

at185-86 (claiming Board of Parole mistakenly denied petitioner's release); Brown, 610 F.2d at

677 (challenging content of inaccurate pre-sentence report used to deny parol). A petitioner

filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 must file the petition in the

judicial district of the petitioner's custodian. Hutchings, 835 F.2d at187; Brown, 610 F.2d at 677. 

In this case, Petitioner is alleging that Respondent is incorrectly and unlawfully failing to

give him credit for time served on a concurrently served New York state conviction. Petitioner is

thus challenging the execution of his sentence rather than the imposition of that sentence. 

Therefore, his petition is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. In addition, because Petitioner is

currently incarcerated at the Taft Correctional Institution, Taft, California, and because that

facility lies within the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division, this Court has jurisdiction

to proceed to the merits of the amended petition. See U.S. v. Giddings, 740 F.2d 770, 772 (9th

Cir.1984). 

///

///

Case 1:07-cv-01724-OWW -TAG Document 6 Filed 01/22/08 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases may be applied to petitions for writ of habeas corpus other than 1

those brought under § 2254 at the Court’s discretion. See, Rule 1 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Civil

Rule 81(a)(2) provides that the rules are “applicable to proceedings for . . . habeas corpus . . . to the extent that the

practice in such proceedings is not set forth in statutes of the United States and has heretofore conformed to the

practice of civil actions.” Fed. R. Civ. P 81(a)(2). 

In the event Respondent is unable to obtain a photocopy of prisoner appeals and intends to file a 2

computerized printout of the disposition, Respondent must also provide the Court with translation of the internal

codes used in the printout. To the extent the claims concern prison policy and procedure not accessible to the Court

by electronic means (Westlaw/Lexis), Respondent must provide the Court with a photocopy of all prison policies

and/or procedures at issue in the case. This includes any internal prison policies of which a prisoner complains and

is subject to. 

Counsel for the “Institution” means private Counsel representing contracted facilities such as Taft 3

Correctional Institution, (Wackenhut Corrections Corporation), or California City Correctional Center (Corrections

Corporation of America). 

3

ORDER

Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the Court 1

HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. Respondent SHALL FILE an ANSWER addressing the merits of the Petition

within SIXTY (60) days of the date of service of this order. Respondent shall

include with the response any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to

the resolution of the issues presented in the amended petition, including copies of

appeals taken by a prisoner within the prison and before the Bureau of Prisons.

2

Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. The Court recognizes that

Counsel on behalf of the Government and/or the Institution may wish to respond 3

on separate issues raised in the Petition. However, the Court will accept only one

(1) “Answer.” Such Answer SHALL CONTAIN all argument with respect to all

of the issues raised in the Petition, whether formulated by Counsel for the

Government or the Institution. 

2. Respondent SHALL FILE a Notice of Appearance within TWENTY (20) days of

the date of service of this Order. The Notice SHALL indicate the name of the

individual(s) who will be representing the Government and/or the Institution. The

Notice is necessary to ensure that the appropriate counsel for Respondent is being

served by the Court. The submission of the Notice of Appearance will terminate

Case 1:07-cv-01724-OWW -TAG Document 6 Filed 01/22/08 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

Court service on those listed in paragraph 4.

3. Petitioner’s TRAVERSE, if any, is due on or before THIRTY (30) days from the

date Respondent’s Answer is filed.

4. The Clerk of the Court SHALL serve a copy of this Order along with a copy of the

Petition and all exhibits on the Office of the United States Attorney for the

Eastern District of California, an agent for the appropriate Correctional Institution

if applicable, and the United States Bureau of Prisons. 

All motions shall be submitted on the record and briefs filed without oral argument unless

otherwise ordered by the Court. Local Rule 78-230(h). All provisions of Local Rule 11-110 are

applicable to this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 18, 2008 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:07-cv-01724-OWW -TAG Document 6 Filed 01/22/08 Page 4 of 4