United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Texarkana Division
O. Hickey United States District Judge
the Court is a Motion to Review Information filed by Movant
Robert Ray Hester. (ECF No. 44). Also before the Court is a
second Motion to Review Information filed by Movant. (ECF No.
45). The Court finds that no response to the motions is
necessary. The Court finds the matter ripe for consideration.
For the reasons discussed below, the motions will be denied.
March 3, 2005, the Court sentenced Movant to one month's
imprisonment and five years' supervised release in
connection with Movant's plea of guilty on one count of
knowingly making a false statement on a loan application, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. On June 19, 2005, Movant
began serving his term of supervised release. The terms of
Movant's supervised release included, among other things,
the condition that he would not commit another federal,
state, or local crime.
February 18, 2008, Movant was arrested in Bowie County,
Texas, and was charged with aggravated assault on a public
servant. On February 22, 2008, the Court issued a warrant for
Movant regarding his supervised release. Movant was
subsequently sentenced to a term of twenty-five years'
imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
(“TDCJ”) after being found guilty by a jury on
two counts of criminal mischief and three counts of
aggravated assault on a public servant. On May 6, 2009, the
U.S. Probation Office filed an amended petition for a warrant
for Movant on his supervised release, reflecting Movant's
Texas state convictions, as well as additional reported
violations of the terms of his supervised release.
September 27, 2016 the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United
States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas,
ordered the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus ad
prosequendum, directing that Movant be brought before this
Court for proceedings related to the revocation of his
supervised release. On January 25, 2017, the Court held a
revocation hearing regarding Movant's supervised release.
On January 26, 2017, the Court entered a revocation judgment,
revoking Movant's supervised release and sentencing him
to a term of imprisonment of “[t]welve (12) months and
[o]ne (1) day, with credit for time served in federal
custody.” (ECF No. 42).
March 5, 2018, Movant filed a Motion to Review Information
(the “First Motion”). (ECF No. 44). Movant states
that he has made parole on his term of imprisonment in the
TDCJ, and is currently in custody of the U.S. Marshal,
awaiting transfer to the Federal Bureau of Prisons
(“BOP”) to serve the federal sentence related to
his revocation in this case. Movant also states that the
Court told him in the revocation hearing that he would be
granted credit for time served on writ in federal custody in
connection with the revocation proceedings. Movant asserts
that on February 14, 2018, he communicated with the BOP via
telephone regarding receiving credit toward his federal
sentence, and the BOP agreed that he is entitled to credit
for time served on writ in connection with the revocation
proceedings in this Court. However, Movant asserts that the BOP
informed him that the Court must provide the BOP with certain
information in order for him to receive the credit he seeks.
To that end, Movant asks the Court to provide the BOP with
court documentation stating either that Movant should be
awarded the credit he seeks or that Movant's sentence
should be run concurrent with the jail time he has completed.
April 19, 2018, Movant filed a second Motion to Review
Information (the “Second Motion”). (ECF No. 45).
The Second Motion is similar in substance to the First Motion
and asks the Court to contact the BOP so that Movant will
receive credit for time served in federal custody from
September 21, 2016, through March 1, 2017. Movant states that
if the Court reviews the audio recording from the January 25,
2017, revocation hearing, it will find that the Court stated
it would award Movant credit toward the imposed sentence.
asks the Court to provide the BOP with court documentation
instructing that Movant should be awarded credit toward his
current sentence for time served from February 22, 2008,
through June 26, 2009, as well as from September 21, 2016,
through March 1, 2017. Movant asks in the alternative that
the Court instruct the BOP to run his current sentence
18 of the United States Code discusses credit for prior
custody as follows:
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.
18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) (emphasis added). “Congress
made clear that a defendant could not receive a double credit
for his detention time.” United States v.
Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 337 (1992). Given this language,
it is clear that Movant cannot be credited for time spent in
custody before his federal sentencing if said time has been
credited towards another sentence. Id. at 334.
review of the audio recording from the January 25, 2017,
revocation hearing reveals that, during the hearing, Movant
broached the subject of receiving credit toward his sentence
for a period of February 22, 2008, through June 26, 2009, as
well as for the time he spent on writ in connection with the
revocation proceedings. The Court informed Movant that the
BOP would give him any credit to which he was entitled.
However, the Court then told Movant that it was unsure
whether he would be entitled to credit for the period of
February 22, 2008, through June 26, 2009, because he was in
Texas state custody during that time. The Court also told
Movant that he would be unable to receive credit for the time
spent on writ in connection with the revocation proceedings
if he was receiving credit toward his ...