Case Name: Alisha STEVENSON, Appellant, v. FCI WASECA; Bureau of Prisons; Ricardo Rios, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-08
Citations: 383 F. App'x 587
Docket Number: No. 09-3918
Parties: Alisha STEVENSON, Appellant, v. FCI WASECA; Bureau of Prisons; Ricardo Rios, Appellees.
Judges: Before LOKEN, BRIGHT and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 383
Pages: 587–588

Head Matter:
Alisha STEVENSON, Appellant, v. FCI WASECA; Bureau of Prisons; Ricardo Rios, Appellees.
No. 09-3918.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: June 17, 2010.
Filed: July 8, 2010.
Before LOKEN, BRIGHT and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Alisha Stevenson is currently serving a 41-month sentence at FCI Waseca, which is operated by the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"), for distribution of cocaine. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e)(2)(B), the BOP is authorized, in its discretion, to reduce the sentences of inmates who were convicted of a nonviolent offense and who complete a drug treatment program. Stevenson filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging the BOP's policy of denying such a sentence reduction to inmates who, like Stevenson, received an enhancement to their advisory sentencing guidelines calculation for possession of a firearm. See 28 C.F.R. § 550.58(a)(l)(vi)(B). Stevenson argues that the BOP promulgated this rule in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"). See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). The district court rejected this argument and dismissed Stevenson's habeas petition.
We have already held that 28 C.F.R. § 550.58 was validly promulgated under the Administrative Procedure Act. See Gatewood v. Outlaw, 560 F.3d 843, 848-49 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 558 U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 490, 175 L.Ed.2d 350 (2009). Stevenson acknowledges that Gatewood is controlling on this issue, but she asks us to reconsider that decision. We have no power to do so, as "it is a cardinal rule in our circuit that one panel is bound by the decision of a prior panel." United States v. Betcher, 534 F.3d 820, 823-24 (8th Cir.2008) (quoting Owsley v. Luebbers, 281 F.3d 687, 690 (8th Cir.2002)), cert. denied, 555 U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 962, 173 L.Ed.2d 153 (2009). Moreover, the BOP recently promulgated 28 C.F.R. § 550.55, which reaffirms the challenged policy and addresses the alleged APA shortcomings that Stevenson identifies in § 550.58. Stevenson did not enter the drug treatment program until after March 16, 2009, when this new rule went into effect. See 74 Fed.Reg. 1892, 1892 (Jan. 14, 2009). Therefore, even if Gateiuood were not controlling, Stevenson has identified no defect in § 550.55, which also prohibits her from receiving a sentence reduction. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal of Stevenson's habeas petition.
. The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Janie S. Mayeron, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.