Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-08008/USCOURTS-ca10-92-08008-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerome McClinton
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT AUG 18 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Clerk 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

JEROME MCCLINTON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 92-8008 

(D.C. No. 91-CR-061B) 

(D. Wyoming) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before SEYMOUR, ANDERSON, and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

On January 9, 1992, the district court sentenced Jerome 

Mcclinton to serve nine months in prison for maliciously conveying 

false information to law enforcement officers in violation of 18 

U.S.C. § 35(b) (1988). The sentence was entered upon Mr. 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 92-8008 Document: 010110276758 Date Filed: 08/18/1992 Page: 1
McClinton's guilty plea and will expire later this summer. Mr. 

Mcclinton argues that the sentencing court failed to credit him 

fully for time served on a Louisiana state conviction, which would 

have resulted in his release. After considering the record, we 

disagree and affirm. 

In May 1990, Mr. Mcclinton telephoned the police in Cheyenne, 

Wyoming and falsely told them that he had been approached by a 

Cheyenne resident who offered to pay him to shoot at a Greyhound 

passenger bus. Mr. Mcclinton apparently made this call in an 

effort to get the police to investigate the Cheyenne resident, who 

was his ex-wife. See rec., vol. II, at 12-13. His plan 

backfired, and a warrant for his arrest was issued on July 15, 

1991. At that time, Mr. Mcclinton was completing a sentence in 

Louisiana state prison on an unrelated offense, and a federal 

detainer was served on him. He was eligible for parole on the 

state offense on August 13, 1991. Parole was denied on that date 

by the Louisiana authorities, assertedly in part because of the 

federal detainer. Appellant's Brief at 3. Mr. Mcclinton was 

taken by federal authorities to Wyoming in September. He 

ultimately pled guilty on November 21, 1991 to the federal charge 

against him. He was sentenced in January, 1992, at which time the 

district court gave him credit on his federal sentence for the 

time he was incarcerated after the expiration of his state 

sentence, November 14, 1991. Rec., vol. III, at 13. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 92-8008 Document: 010110276758 Date Filed: 08/18/1992 Page: 2
Mr. Mcclinton bases his argument on this court's decision in 

Bloomgren v. Belaski, 948 F.2d 688 (10th Cir. 1991). We held 

there that prisoners otherwise entitled to release from state 

custody, who are kept in state prison solely because of a federal 

detainer, are entitled to credit for state time served. Id. at 

690. We held further that it is the burden of federal authorities 

to establish that the detainer was not the reason for the 

prisoner's continued detention. Id. Mr. Mcclinton argues that 

the authorities here failed to make such a showing and that remand 

is therefore required. 

We need not remand, however, because it clearly appears from 

the record that the district court effectively credited Mr. 

Mcclinton for the time served after his parole was denied. At 

sentencing, the district court stated that "the basic recommendation in this case would be to split the guidelines .... And 

that would be twelve months. But I recognize the fact that you 

have been in prison since August. So there was a good two and a 

half months that you have served that you won't get federal credit 

for .... So I will give you a little credit up front for 

those." Rec., vol. III at 12-13 (emphasis added). The court then 

sentenced Mr. Mcclinton to nine months. Id. Thus, while Mr. 

Mcclinton was not given credit for time served in the formal 

sense, the district court's choice of sentence within the 

guideline range reflected the time Mr. Mcclinton had served since 

August. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 92-8008 Document: 010110276758 Date Filed: 08/18/1992 Page: 3
Finally, we note that the record in this case differs 

substantially from that before us in Bloomgren. In that case, 

"[t]he record contain[ed] no clear explanation for Bloomgren's 

continued state detention other than the existence of the federal 

arrest warrant." 948 F.2d at 690. Here, the record reflects 

consideration by the parole board of Mr. McClinton's extensive 

criminal history. Indeed, the parole board decision form 

Mr. Mcclinton has presented to this court indicates five reasons 

for the denial of parole. In addition to the detainer, the parole 

board cited the serious nature of the offense, Mr. McClinton's 

record, his prior felony convictions, and an unsatisfactory 

probation history. See Addendum to Appellant's Brief. The 

decision whether to award parole is completely within the 

discretion of the state authorities, and nothing before us 

supports Mr. McClinton's assertion that but for the detainer he 

would have been paroled in August. 

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the decision of the district court. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-4-

Entered for the Court 

Stephanie K. Seymour 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-8008 Document: 010110276758 Date Filed: 08/18/1992 Page: 4