Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Case No. 4:92cr4034-WS

vs. Case No.: 

THOMAS DEWAYNE WHITE,

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY LETTER REQUEST

Defendant submitted a letter to the district judge, which has been referred to the

undersigned for review. Doc. 86. Defendant alleges he was told, with regard to jail

credit, "that my J & C was silent. I guess that meant that you didn't instruct them to

award me those jail credits . . . ." Defendant sets forth the dates of his designation to

different institutions, including his return to state custody for almost a year. He asks for

an award of "the [aforementioned] pre/post trial jail credits towards this sentence." 

Case 4:92-cr-04034-WS-WCS Document 87 Filed 04/08/08 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

Case No. 4:92cr4034-WS

Section 3585, United States Code, provides: 

 (a) Commencement of sentence.– A sentence to a term of

imprisonment commences on the date the defendant is received in

custody awaiting transportation to, or arrives voluntarily to commence

service of sentence at, the official detention facility at which the sentence

is to be served. 

 (b) Credit for prior custody.– A defendant shall be given credit toward

the service of a term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official

detention prior to the date the sentence commences– 

 (1) as a result of the offense for which the sentence was

imposed; or

 (2) as a result of any other charge for which the defendant

was arrested after the commission of the offense for which

the sentence was imposed;

that has not been credited against another sentence. 

The Attorney General through the Bureau of Prisons, rather than the sentencing

court, is authorized to compute the award of credit under § 3585(b). United States v.

Williams, 425 F.3d 987, 990 (11th Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). 

As a result, "a federal prisoner dissatisfied with computation of his

sentence must pursue the administrative remedy available through the

federal prison system before seeking judicial review of his sentence." 

United States v. Flanagan, 868 F.2d 1544, 1546 (11th Cir. 1989)

(interpreting § 3585(b)'s predecessor, § 3568). "A claim for credit for time

served is brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 after the exhaustion of

administrative remedies." United States v. Nyhuis, 211 F.3d 1340, 1345

(11th Cir.2000). "Exhaustion of administrative remedies is jurisdictional."

Gonzalez v. United States, 959 F.2d 211, 212 (11th Cir.1992) (addressing

denial of a § 2241 petition).

425 F.3d at 990 (dismissing the unexhausted issue as not ripe for judicial review).

There is no indication that Defendant has exhausted administrative remedies. 

Even if he exhausted remedies, a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition should be

filed in the district of confinement. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443, 124

Case 4:92-cr-04034-WS-WCS Document 87 Filed 04/08/08 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case No. 4:92cr4034-WS

S.Ct. 2711, 2722, 159 L.Ed.2d 513 (2004). Defendant is not currently confined in this

district. He is incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Ray Brook, New

York, located in the Northern District of New York. The address of the main office of

that court, should Defendant wish to file a § 2241 petition after exhausting his 

administrative remedies, is P.O. Box 7367, Syracuse, NY, 13261. 

It is therefore respectfully RECOMMENDED that Defendant's letter (doc. 86),

treated as a request for jail credit, be SUMMARILY DENIED. 

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on April 8, 2008.

 S/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 10 days after

being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of

review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 4:92-cr-04034-WS-WCS Document 87 Filed 04/08/08 Page 3 of 3