King v. Lindsay

254 F. App'x 135
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedNovember 9, 2007
Docket07-3174
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 254 F. App'x 135 (King v. Lindsay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
King v. Lindsay, 254 F. App'x 135 (3d Cir. 2007).

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Andrew King appeals the District Court’s order denying his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.

The procedural history of this case and the details of King’s claims are well known to the parties, set forth in the District Court’s thorough opinion, and need not be discussed at length. In his § 2241 petition, King argued that he was entitled to credit on his federal sentence for time served before trial. The District Court denied the petition, and King filed a timely notice of appeal.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and exercise plenary review over the District Court’s legal conclusions. Cradle v. U.S. ex rel. Miner, 290 F.3d 536, 538 (3d Cir.2002). While King makes several arguments regarding the timing and the reasons for the pretrial detention at issue, he does not dispute that the time was credited towards his state sentence for a parole violation. As explained by the District Court, under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), a defendant can only receive credit towards a federal sentence for prior custody *136 “that has not been credited against another sentence.”

For the above reasons, as well as those set forth by the Distl’ict Court, we will affirm the District Court’s order. King’s motion to expedite the appeal is denied as moot.

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

Related

King v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
285 F. App'x 2 (Third Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
254 F. App'x 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-lindsay-ca3-2007.