1

 Beaumont is located in Jefferson County, Texas. Defendant’s current place of incarceration is thus located in the

Beaumont Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. See 28 U.S.C. § 124(c)(2). 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

v. ) No. 3:03-CR-0434-D

)

SCOTT WESLEY HALL, )

Defendant. )

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

By Order of Reference dated May 5, 2005, the District Court referred defendant’s “Motion

for Good Time Credits” to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for hearing, if necessary, and for

recommendation. 

Defendant, a federal prisoner currently incarcerated in a United States Penitentiary located

in Beaumont, Texas,1

 filed the instant motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) to obtain fourteen

months credit to his current sentence. Although defendant has filed the motion in his criminal

action in this Court, the proper construction for such motion is a petition for writ of habeas corpus

filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See United States v. Cleto, 956 F.2d 83, 84 (5th Cir. 1992) (per

curiam). When a federal prisoner “challenges the execution of his sentence rather than the validity

of his conviction and sentence”, the proper vehicle is a § 2241 petition filed in the district of incarceration. Id. In fact, the district of incarceration is the only district with jurisdiction to consider

such a § 2241 action. Id.

Consequently, it is hereby recommended that the Court CONSTRUE defendant’s “Motion

for Good Time Credits” (doc. 115) as a petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and DIRECT

 

 Case 3:03-cr-00434-D Document 119 Filed 08/01/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 265
2

the Clerk of the Court to open a new civil action, file the instant motion in that action as a § 2241

petition filed April 27, 2005, and immediately transfer the new § 2241 action to the United States

District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division, without further judicial

direction. 

SIGNED this 1st day of August, 2005.

 ___________________________________

 IRMA CARRILLO RAMIREZ

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE AND

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL/OBJECT

The United States District Clerk shall serve a copy of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation on petitioner by mailing a copy to him. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), any party who

desires to object to these findings, conclusions and recommendation must file and serve written

objections within ten days after being served with a copy. A party filing objections must specifically

identify those findings, conclusions, or recommendation to which objections are being made. The

District Court need not consider frivolous, conclusory, or general objections. Failure to file written

objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation within ten days after being

served with a copy shall bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and legal

conclusions of the Magistrate Judge that are accepted by the District Court, except upon grounds

of plain error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

 ___________________________________

 IRMA CARRILLO RAMIREZ

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 Case 3:03-cr-00434-D Document 119 Filed 08/01/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 266