UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

Case Number 09-20423-BC

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

ADAM LEE ROOT,

Defendant.

______________________________________ /

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED

Defendant Adam Lee Root entered a guilty plea to a charge of receiving counterfeit

securities of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 473 and on April 12, 2010 was sentenced

to 18 months in custody to be served concurrent with a sentence imposed on June 16, 2008 by the

Gratiot County Circuit Court [Dkt. #24]. Now before the Court is Defendant’s pro se petition

seeking credit on his federal sentence for time served in state custody [Dkt. #25]. Defendant was

granted parole from state custody on October 30, 2008 with a projected parole date of June 23, 2009,

but his parole was suspended on April 6, 2009 due to charges pending in the instant case. Defendant

seeks credit for his time spent in state custody either after his projected parole date of June 23, 2009

or after the date of his federal arraignment on October 1, 2009. The petition contends that Defendant

did not receive credit on his federal sentence for the time he spent in custody awaiting his

arraignment and subsequent sentencing on the federal charges, and that his grievances filed with the

Michigan Department of Corrections requesting that his parole be reinstated have been denied.

Federal law does provide credit in certain circumstances for time spent in custody while

awaiting trial under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). The statute provides:

1:09-cr-20423-TLL-CEB Doc # 27 Filed 01/31/11 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 108
-2-

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.

A district court, however, lacks jurisdiction over a post-conviction petition requesting

sentence credit for other time served. United States v. Westmoreland, 974 F.2d 736, 737 (6th Cir.

1992). The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), has jurisdiction to determine

the appropriate credit for time served. Id. A defendant must challenge the BOP’s determination and

exhaust available administrative remedies before jurisdiction will vest in a district court to review

the BOP’s determination.

Here, Defendant’s motion does not indicate that he has exhausted available administrative

remedies to challenge the determination of credit for time served. Thus, this Court lacks jurisdiction

to grant Defendant the relief that he seeks.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant’s “motion for credit time served” [Dkt. # 25]

is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: January 31, 2011

1:09-cr-20423-TLL-CEB Doc # 27 Filed 01/31/11 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 109
-3-

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on January 31, 2011.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

1:09-cr-20423-TLL-CEB Doc # 27 Filed 01/31/11 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 110