T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dentexce ptundert he * doctr i nes of l aw of the ca s e, r es j udi cat a and c ol l at er al es t oppel . I tm aybe ci t ed, how ever , fori t s per s uas i ve val ue cons i s t entw i th Fed. R . A pp. P. 32. 1 ( eff. D ec. 1 , 2 0 0 6 ) an d 1 0 th C ir . R . 3 2 . 1 (eff. Jan . 1 , 2 0 0 7 ). A ft erexami ni ng the br i efs and the appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s t hr ee-j udge ** panel has det erm i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notbe of mat er i al a s s is ta n c e in th e d e te rm in a tio n o f th is a p p e a l. See F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 (G ). T h e c a u se is th e re fo re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### January26,200 7 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT R O B E R T A L L E N L IT T L E , J R .,

P e tit io n e r-A p p e llan t, N o. 06- 1285 v . (D . o f C o lo .) R O N W I L E Y , W ar den,

R es pondent - A ppel l ee. ( D . C. N o. 05 - CV - 53 2- M SK - CB S )

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efo re T AC HA , C h ie f J u d g e , HA RTZ , and T YMKOV I CH , C i rcui tJudg es. **

R o b ert L ittl e is a fed era l pri so n er w h o see k s rev iew o f th e d istri ct co u rt ’s d e n ial o f

h is 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 4 1 p e tit io n . L itt le c laim s h e w a s d e n ied th e rig h t to good t i m e cr edi t s s erved on hi s 12- y earfede r al s ent ence . Fors ubs t ant i al l yt he-2-

s ame r eas ons s t at ed bythe magi s tr at e j udge, w hos e r ecomm endat i on the di s tr i ct c o u r ta d o p t e d , we AFF I RM . I . Backg r ound I n 1994, a C al i forni a j udge found Li t t l e gui l tyof fi r e- bom bi ng a r es i dence and s ent ence d hi m t o one- hundr ed mont hs i m pr i s onm ent( ei ghty ear s and four mo n th s ) . As a j u v e n i l e , L i t t l e wa s s e n tt o th e Ca l i fo rn i a Yo u th Au th o r i ty( CY A) to se rv e h is tim e . L itt le w a s in c u sto d yo f th e C Y A f

ro m Ju n e 2 9 , 1 9 9 4 to N ovember8, 1995, atw hi ch poi nthe w as par ol ed t o the U ni t ed St at es M ar s hal Ser vi ce ( U SM S) beca us e fe der al char ges had bee n i ni t i at ed aga i ns thi m i n the fe d e ra l D is tr ic t C o u rt fo r t h e D is tr ic t o f U ta h . L i t t l e’ s i ndi ctm entar os e fr om t he bombi ng of a dorm i t oryata l ocal col l ege in S t. G e o rg e , U tah , b e fo re h is s tate se n ten c e w a s im p o se d . L itt le m o v e d to S t. G eor ge i n the s um m erof 1993, w her e he w as know n t o have a ffi l i at ed w i th a sk in h e a d o rg a n iza tio n m a n ife stin g ra c ial h a tre d . D u rin g late S e p tem b e r o r e a rly O ct ober , 1993, L i t t l e t ol d fr i ends t hathe w as goi ng t o expl ode a bomb ata l ocal col l ege dorm i t ory . O n O ct ober10, 1993, a homem ade pi pe bomb expl oded out s i de a dorm i t oryoccupi ed byt w o bl ack s tudent s . B etw een N ovember1995 and A ugus t1996, L i t t l e w as tr i ed as an adul t , convi ct ed, and s ent ence d t o tw el ve y e a rs fo r M a licio u s D e stru c tio n w ith U se o f a n E x p lo siv e a n d C iv il R ig h ts V io la tio n s in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 8 4 4 (i ) a n d 4 2 U .S .C . § 3 6 3 1 (a ).-3-

L itt le w a s re tu rn e d to th e C Y A o n A u g u st 8 , 1 9 9 6 , to r e su m e h is C a lifo rn ia se n ten c e . A f

ter h a v in g se rv e d ju st tw o y e a rs a n d e ig h t m o n th s o f h is ju v e n ile s ent ence , L i t t l e w as par ol ed t o the U SM S i n 1997 t o begi n s ervi ng hi s fede r al s ent ence . L i t t l e cl ai m s he w as ent i t l ed t o good t i m e cr edi t s forthe per i od s panni ng hi s i ni t i al r el eas e t o t empora ryfede r al cus t odyfortr i al ( A ugus t8, 1996) a n d th e d a yo n w h ic h h e b e g a n s e rv in g h is fe d e ra l s e n te n c e (J a n u a ry 2 1 , 1 9 9 7 ). C ontr aryt o the magi s tr at e j udge’ s as s er t i on thatthi s 14- m onth, 13- dayper i od w as p ro p e rlya p p lied a g a in st h is ju v e n ile s e n ten c e , L itt le a rg u e s th a t h is ju v e n ile comm i t m entatC Y A w as m er el ya “c i vi l comm i t m ent ” and nota s ent ence for p u rp o s e s o f

a p p l y i n g c r e d i t s fo rg o o d t i me s e r v e d u n d e rfe d e r a l l a w. I I . D i s cus s i on L i t t l e as s ert s hi s r i ghtt o fede r al cr edi tforgood t i m e s erved under18 U . S. C . § 3585, w hi ch pr ovi des thata defendant“s hal l be gi ven cr edi tt ow ar d t he s ervi ce of

a t erm of i m pr i s onm entforanyt i m e he ha s s penti n offi ci al det ent i on pri or t o the dat e t he sentence co m m ences — t hat has not been credi t ed ag ai nst anothers ent ence . ” B as ed on the mat er i al s i n the r ecor d, t he magi s tr at e j udge concl uded Li t t l e w as s ervi ng a s t at e s ent ence pr i ort o hi s par ol e on N ovember8, 1995 t o s t and tr i al and thatthe s ubs equentdet ent i on w as pr oper l ycr edi t ed t o t hat s t at e s ent ence . L i t t l e affi r m s he w as i n the cus t odyof C Y A att hi s t i m e but ar gues thata j uveni l e adj udi cat i on i s nott echni cal l ya “s ent ence ” and, t hus , t he-4-

l as t14 m onths of hi s i ncar cer at i on ( a por t i on of w hi ch he s penti n U SM S cus t ody aw ai t i ng tr i al ) w as neverpr oper l ycr edi t ed. L ittle is n o t e n title d to d o u b le c re d it fo r h is tim e s e rv e d a t C Y A . See Uni t ed Stat es v. Wi ls on , 5 0 3 U . S . 3 2 9 , 3 3 7 (19 9 2 ) (§ 3 5 8 5 is cl ea r th at prison ers m a yn o t re c e iv e d o u b le c re d it fo r d e ten tio n tim e ). A c c o rd in g ly , if L itt le p re v io u slyre c e iv e d sta te c re d it fo r th e fo u rte e n m o n th s a t issu e in th is c a se , h e is n o t e n title d to fe d e ra l c re d it fo r t h a t s a m e p e ri o d . Jef f ers on v. Uni t ed Stat es , 389 F. 2d 385 ( 2d C i r . 1968) . T he magi s tr at e j udge w as unequi vocal i n hi s concl us i on thatL i t t l e r ece i ved cr edi tfort i m e s erved aga i ns thi s s t at e s ent ence and w e defer to th a t fin d in g . A s forL i tt l e’ s l egal ar gum entthata j uveni l e adj udi cat i on does not cons t i tut e a s ent ence forpurpos es of cr edi t i ng t i m e under18 U . S. C . § 3585, our cas e l aw s ugges t s the oppos i t e. T he Tent h C i r cui tr ecogni zes the conf i nementof ju v e n ile s a s a s e n te n c e . See , e. g. , Un itedS ta tes v . A lb e rty , 4 0 F .3 d 1 1 3 2 (1 0 th C i r . 1994) ( defe ndant ’ s s ent ence s i n tw o j uveni l e hea r i ngs r an conc urr entt o eac h o th e r); Uni t ed Stat es v. Mi l l er , 9 8 7 F .2 d 1 4 6 2 , 1 4 6 5 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 9 3 ) (ju v e n ile s e n te n c e s m a yb e u s e d to a d d p o in ts to d e fe n d a n t’ s c ri m in a l h is to ry c a te g o ry). See als o U S S G § 4 A 1 .2 (d )(2 )(A ) (p e rm itt in g a tw o -p o in t in c re a se fo r “ e a c h a d u lt orju v e n ile s ent ence to c o n fin e m e n t o f a t lea st 6 0 d a y s” if

c o n fin e m e n t w a s w ith in fiv e y e a rs o f

in s ta n t o ffe n s e ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ).-5-

A ccor di ngl y , w e fi nd no err ori n ei therthe magi s tr at e j udge’ s R eportand R ecomm endat i on orthe di s tr i ctcourt ’ s opi ni on adopt i ng the conc l us i ons of the m agi s tr at e j udge. I I I . C oncl usi on Forthe r eas ons s t at ed above , w e A FFIRM t he di s tr i ctcourt ’ s deni al of L itt le’ s 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 4 1 p e tit io n . In a d d iti o n , w e D E N Y h is a p p lica tio n to pr oc e e d I FP. E n tered fo r th e C o u rt T i m othyM . T ym kovi ch C i r cui tJ udge