Harry William Theriault v. T. L. Peek, United States Bureau of Prisons

406 F.2d 117
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 31, 1969
Docket26465_1
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 406 F.2d 117 (Harry William Theriault v. T. L. Peek, United States Bureau of Prisons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harry William Theriault v. T. L. Peek, United States Bureau of Prisons, 406 F.2d 117 (5th Cir. 1969).

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal by a federal prisoner from a summary judgment denying his petition to compel an employee of the United States Bureau of Prisons to remove from his prison record a notation that his sentence was “inoperative” for 106 days during which he was an escapee.1

The appellant, never having been tried for the escape, contends that the prison employee acted without judicial authority in making the notation, and that in doing so the employee was “computing the term” of his imprisonment, contrary to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3568.

The district court denied relief because the appellant failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before the Bureau of Prisons.2 We prefer to base affirmance, however, upon our conclusion that the appellant’s allegations do not entitle him to relief. Escape from prison interrupts service, and the time elapsing between escape and retaking contribute nothing to the service of the sentence.3 The notation complained of is no more than a clerical entry relevant to a determination of the length of the appellant’s actual service. The appellant having alleged no discrepancy between the notation and the actual period of his escapee status, the district court committed no error in denying his petition.

Affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Alex Cartagena-Lopez
979 F.3d 356 (Fifth Circuit, 2020)
United States v. Buchanan
638 F.3d 448 (Fourth Circuit, 2011)
Luther v. Vanyur
14 F. Supp. 2d 773 (E.D. North Carolina, 1997)
Manuel Nick Solsona, Jr. v. Warden, F.C.I.
821 F.2d 1129 (Fifth Circuit, 1987)
Caballery v. United States Parole Commission
513 F. Supp. 1071 (S.D. New York, 1981)
Henrique v. United States Marshal
476 F. Supp. 618 (N.D. California, 1979)
Hartwell v. Jackson
403 F. Supp. 1229 (District of Columbia, 1975)
Walter Martin, Jr. v. United States
517 F.2d 906 (Eighth Circuit, 1975)
United States v. George Gordon Liddy
510 F.2d 669 (D.C. Circuit, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
406 F.2d 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harry-william-theriault-v-t-l-peek-united-states-bureau-of-prisons-ca5-1969.