Marcus McAdams v. Craig Stalhood

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 24-2360 ___________________________

Marcus McAdams

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Craig Stalhood, Acting Warden, FCI-Forrest City, Arkansas 1

Defendant - Appellee ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Delta ____________

Submitted: July 18, 2025 Filed: July 24, 2025 [Unpublished] ____________

Before ERICKSON, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Marcus McAdams claims he is eligible for “time credits” on one of the consecutive sentences he is serving. 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4); see 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

1 Craig Stalhood has become Acting Warden of the Federal Correctional Institute in Forrest City, Arkansas, and is substituted as respondent under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). He did not, however, exhaust all available remedies by filing a timely administrative appeal or seeking an extension after his request was denied. See Mathena v. United States, 577 F.3d 943, 944, 946 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying de novo review and explaining that a prisoner must “first present[] his claim to the BOP”). Nor does he dispute that his failure to exhaust required dismissal, see Manning v. Ryan, 13 F.4th 705, 707 n.2 (8th Cir. 2021) (per curiam), much less identify “any special circumstances” suggesting “that [it] should not be required in this case,” Kendrick v. Carlson, 995 F.2d 1440, 1447 (8th Cir. 1993). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court. 2 See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

2 The Honorable Lee P. Rudofsky, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the recommended disposition of the Honorable Edie R. Ervin, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-