Warren v. Garrett

E.D. Arkansas

Warren v. Garrett

DecidedDecember 20, 2024

Docket2:23-cv-00190

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Warren v. Garrett, (E.D. Ark. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION ARRICK WARREN PLAINTIFF Reg # 11492-031

v. CASE NO. 2:23-CV-00190-BSM C. GARRETT, Warden FCI-Forrest City DEFENDANT ORDER After careful review of the record, Magistrate Judge Benecia B. Moore’s recommended disposition [Doc. No. 10] is adopted and Arrick Warren’s petition [Doc. No. 1] is dismissed without prejudice because the relief requested cannot be granted. See United States v. Houck, 2 F.4th 1082, 1085 (8th Cir. 2021) (district courts do not have the authority to change a prisoner’s place of confinement under the CARES Act and 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2)); United States v. Rodriguez-Mendez, 65 F.4th 1000, 1001 (8th Cir. 2023) (the sentencing court may reduce a term of imprisonment); see also Resp. Arrick Warren’s Pet. Writ Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Ex. 1, United States District Court District of Kansas Judgment (Warren’s sentencing court). Thus, the clerk is directed to close the case. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of December, 2024. Tarver SOQ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION ARRICK WARREN PLAINTIFF Reg # 11492-031

v. CASE NO. 2:23-CV-00190-BSM C. GARRETT, Warden FCI-Forrest City DEFENDANT ORDER After careful review of the record, Magistrate Judge Benecia B. Moore’s recommended disposition [Doc. No. 10] is adopted and Arrick Warren’s petition [Doc. No. 1] is dismissed without prejudice because the relief requested cannot be granted. See United States v. Houck, 2 F.4th 1082, 1085 (8th Cir. 2021) (district courts do not have the authority to change a prisoner’s place of confinement under the CARES Act and 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2)); United States v. Rodriguez-Mendez, 65 F.4th 1000, 1001 (8th Cir. 2023) (the sentencing court may reduce a term of imprisonment); see also Resp. Arrick Warren’s Pet. Writ Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Ex. 1, United States District Court District of Kansas Judgment (Warren’s sentencing court). Thus, the clerk is directed to close the case. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of December, 2024. Tarver SOQ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Warren v. Garrett, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warren-v-garrett-ared-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack