Ali v. Peters

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Texas
DecidedMarch 12, 2024
Docket4:23-cv-00728
StatusUnknown

This text of Ali v. Peters (Ali v. Peters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ali v. Peters, (N.D. Tex. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION

AMEERA Q. ALI, § (BOP No. 34873-058), § Petitioner, § § v. § Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-728-O § MICHAEL SMITH, Warden, § FMC-Carswell, § § Respondent. §

OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Before the Court is an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 filed by Petitioner Ameera Q. Ali (“Ali”), a federal prisoner at FMC-Carswell. Am. Pet.1- 32, ECF No. 5. Respondent Michael Smith, Warden at FMC-Carswell, filed a response with an appendix. ECF Nos. 10 and 11. Ali has filed a reply. ECF No. 12. After having considered the pleadings, applicable law and relief sought by Ali, the Court concludes that the petition should be DISMISSED for the alternative reasons set out below.

I. RELIEF SOUGHT

Petitioner Ali challenges the Bureau of Prison’s (BOP) purported failure to release her to home confinement under the CARES Act before that Act expired in May 2023. She also complains that the BOP failed to properly calculate earned First Step Act (FSA) Time Credits and apply them to her sentence. She requests the Court review her application for release under the CARES Act and release her immediately. Am. Pet. 1-14, ECF No. 5.

1 II. BACKGROUND-PROCEDURAL HISTORY Ali was sentenced by the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina to an 84-month term of imprisonment for Health Care Fraud Conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1347 and 1349. Resp. 3, ECF No. 10. She was committed to the BOP on February 4, 2021, to serve an 84-month term of imprisonment. App. 35 (BOP Sentence Monitoring

Computation Data), ECF No. 11. Her projected statutory release date via good conduct time is January 20, 2027. Id. As of October 5, 2023, she had served 44.7% of her statutory term. Id. at 36. Ali has also earned the maximum 365 days of FSA Time Credits to be applied to her sentence towards early release to supervision; therefore, her projected release date via the FSA is January 20, 2026. App. 35, and 38 (FSA Time Credit Assessment), ECF No. 11. She has earned an additional 85 days towards prerelease custody. Id. at 38. Ali filed her initial § 2241 petition on July 17, 2023, and in response to a deficiency order, she filed her amended petition on August 10, 2023. Pet, ECF No. 1; Am. Pet., ECF No. 5 She makes two claims in her pleadings. First, Ali claims her FSA Time Credits were improperly

calculated prior to May 11. Am. Pet. 10-11, ECF No. 5. As a result, she claims the proper number of credits were not applied to her sentence and her release date was miscalculated. Id. She contends that had her FSA Time Credits been properly calculated and applied, then she would have served more than 50% of her sentence by May 11. Id. Second, she claims her requests for release under the CARES Act were denied because the BOP erroneously determined she did not serve 50% of her sentence prior to the CARES Act expiration. Id. Ali requests the Court order an immediate review of her application for release under the CARES Act and

2 immediate release.1 Id., pp. 7, 10. III. APPLICABLE LAW A. The CARES Act

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2), the BOP may designate inmates “with lower risk levels and lower needs” to home confinement “for the shorter of 10 percent of the term of imprisonment of that prisoner or 6 months.” 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2). The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) temporarily expanded that authority due to the COVID-19 pandemic and permitted the BOP to place inmates on home confinement during the declared national emergency for a period longer than stated in § 3624(c)(2). Pub. L. No. 116- 136, § 12003(a)(2), (b)(2), 134 Stat. 281 (2020). The BOP’s authority under the CARES Act continued through the national emergency until 30 days after the national emergency ended. H.J.

Res. 7, 118th Cong. (2023) (ending the COVID-19 national emergency on April 10, 2023). Thus, the BOP’s authority to designate an inmate to home confinement beyond the time stated in § 3624 expired on May 11, 2023. The U.S. Department of Justice and BOP set forth a non-exhaustive and non-exclusive set of factors for the BOP to consider in its determinations of which inmates should be released to home confinement—a determination in which the BOP had exclusive authority to make.

During the COVID-19 national emergency, the DOJ and BOP released superseding memoranda setting forth the home confinement factors and responding to the changing nature of the

2 Ali also asks the Court to declare FMC-Carswell violated her 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th Amendment rights. Because the declaratory relief sought for these alleged violations would not shorten the duration of confinement, they are not a proper subject for habeas relief. Biron v. Upton, No. 4:14-cv- 603-O, 2014 WL 3795987, at *1-2 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 1, 2014) (citing Hernandez v. Garrison, 916 F.2d pandemic. Relevant to Ali’s claims are the April 13, 2021 and December 19, 2022 BOP memoranda. App. 1-8 (Home Confinement Memorandum dated April 13, 2021 and Home Criteria and Guidance Memorandum updated December 19, 2022), ECF No. 11. The factors

included COVID-19 vulnerability and “confirming the inmate has served 50% or more of their sentence . . ..” Id. at 3, 6. Other factors include the inmate’s: disciplinary history; ensuring a verifiable release plan; verifying the primary offense is not violent, a sex offense, or terrorism- related; confirming no current detainer; ensuring inmate is low or minimum security; ensuring inmate has a low or minimum risk of recidivism; and ensuring no gang related activity while incarcerated. Id. at 1-8. The updated December 19 memorandum clarified that the inmate must

serve 50% or more of the “statutory sentence” and the “calculation does not [to] include First Step Act Time Credits.” Id. at 6. B. The First Step Act The First Step Act (FSA) creates a system of earned time credits and other incentives to encourage prisoners to participate in and complete evidence-based recidivism reduction (EBRR) programs and productive activities (PA). 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d). The BOP issued Program Statement 5410.01, First Step Act of 2018 – Time Credits: Procedures for Implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4), (dated November 18, 2022), to establish criteria and procedures for awarding time credits pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4) and 18 U.S.C. § 3624(g) to eligible

inmates. App. 14-33, ECF No. 11. “For every thirty-day period that an eligible inmate has successfully participated in EBRR Programs or (PAs) recommended based on the inmate’s risk and needs assessment, that inmate will earn ten days of FSA Time Credits.” App. 23 (citing 28

291, 293 (5th Cir. 1990)). C.F.R. § 523.42(c)(1)), ECF No. 11.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Spencer v. Bragg
310 F. App'x 678 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
Carlos Poree v. Kandy Collins
866 F.3d 235 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)
Billy Melot v. Thomas Bergami
970 F.3d 596 (Fifth Circuit, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ali v. Peters, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ali-v-peters-txnd-2024.