Opinion ID: 176540
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Voluntariness of State Plea

Text: Hunter finally suggests in passing that the BOP's failure to credit the time that he served as a state prisoner against his federal sentence seriously undermines the voluntariness of his guilty plea in state court. He argues that all parties to the state proceeding, including the state sentencing judge, understood that his state sentence would run concurrently with his federal sentence, and that Hunter's guilty plea was predicated on this understanding. While possibly true, the voluntariness of Hunter's state plea is, as he appears to acknowledge, not a proper subject of this § 2241 proceeding because Hunter is no longer in custody on his state conviction as that section requires. See Maleng v. Cook, 490 U.S. 488, 491-92, 109 S.Ct. 1923, 104 L.Ed.2d 540 (1989); 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c). Whatever may be the proper remedyif any existsto the asserted defects in Hunter's state plea, this § 2241 habeas corpus application is not that.