Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Lacy

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division

June 26, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF
v.
DANIEL LACY DEFENDANT

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          Greg N. Stivers, Judge.

         This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Review Judgment (DN 57). For the reasons outlined below, the motion is DENIED.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On February 8, 2012, Defendant Daniel Lacy (“Lacy”) was arrested and charged with manufacturing methamphetamine, child endangerment, complicity to the possession drug paraphernalia, and complicity to the possession of marijuana. After pleading guilty, Lacy was sentenced to a term of incarceration of fifteen years by the Nelson Circuit Court, Kentucky, on September 21, 2012.[1]

         On November 20, 2013, a federal grand jury indicted Lacy on one count of the unlawful transport of firearms, and one count of unlawfully receiving a firearm that was not registered. (Indictment 1-2, DN 1). On January 28, 2014, Lacy was transferred to the custody of the United States Marshal's Service pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum. (Def.'s Mot. Review J. Ex., at 1, DN 57-1; Writ Habeas Corpus Ad Prosequendum, DN 7). On November 10, 2014, Lacy pleaded guilty to both federal counts, and the Court subsequently imposed the following sentence:

The defendant is hereby committed to the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons to be imprisoned for a total term of 92 months as to each of Counts 1 and 2 in the Indictment, which shall run concurrently. The term of imprisonment shall run concurrently with the sentence of imprisonment the defendant is presently serving in Nelson Circuit Court, Case No. 12-CR-67. Since the conduct in Nelson Circuit Court Case No. 12-CR-67 is relevant conduct to the instant offense of conviction, the defendant will be credited with 23 months and 20 days for which he was incarcerated prior to entering federal custody. Therefore, he is committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of 68 months and 10 days.

(J. & Commitment Order 1, 3, DN 47). The period of incarceration was also to be followed by two years of supervised release. (J. & Commitment Order 4).

         While the record provides little information of what transpired following Lacy's sentencing in federal court, he is currently incarcerated at Federal Correctional Institution Schuylkill (“FCI Schuylkill”), which is located in Minersville, Pennsylvania. During his incarceration, he requested a review of the calculation of his sentence. (Def.'s Mot. Review J. Ex., at 1). In particular, Lacy requested credit for time served beginning on September 21, 2012. (Def.'s Mot. Review J. Ex., at 1). After his request was denied, the National Inmate Appeals Administrator (“NIA Administrator”) also denied the appeal on the basis that Lacy had already received credit for his time in state custody when he was sentenced in federal court. (Def.'s Mot. Review J. Ex., at 1-2). In noting that Lacy was not entitled to the credit, the NIA Administrator also stated:

Furthermore, at the time your federal sentence was imposed, you were in the service of an undischarged term of imprisonment in the state of Kentucky and in federal custody pursuant to a writ. Be advised that time spent in custody under a writ of habeas corpus from non-federal custody will not in and of itself be considered for the purpose of crediting sentence time. The primary reason for “writ” custody is not the federal charge; the federal Court merely “borrows” the prisoner under the provisions of the writ for secondary custody.

(Def.'s Mot. Review J. Ex., at 2).

         In the present motion, Defendant challenges the calculation of the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) of the term of his federal sentence and is seeking credit for the fourteen-month period prior to his federal sentencing. (Def.'s Mot. Review J. 1, DN 57).

         II. DISCUSSION

         The Attorney General, through the BOP, is the individual authorized to grant credit for any presentence detention. See United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 333 (1992). Whether a federal inmate receives credit on a federal sentence for prior custody is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b). In relevant part, the statute provides:

A defendant shall be given credit toward the service of a term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention prior ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.