Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Barton v. Entzel

United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia, Martinsburg

October 7, 2019

CHERRI NICOLE BARTON, Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN ENTZEL, Respondent.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          ROBERT W. TRUMBLE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         On June 17, 2019, Petitioner, then an inmate at the Secure Female Facility Hazelton (“SFFH”), acting pro se, filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the “Petition”). ECF No. 1.[1]

         The matter is now before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation to the District Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule of Prisoner Litigation Procedure (“LR PL P”) 2. For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned recommends that the Petition be denied and dismissed without prejudice.

         II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         A. Petitioner's Conviction and Sentence[2]

         On June 24, 2015, in the Eastern District of Missouri, Petitioner was charged in a five-count indictment with various financial crimes, including aggravated identity theft, and unauthorized use of an access device to defraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1028A, 1029(a)(2) and (b)(1), 1341, 1342, 1343. ECF No. 2. On January 28, 2016, Petitioner entered a guilty plea to Counts 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Indictment pursuant to a written plea agreement. ECF Nos. 37, 38. Petitioner was sentenced on May 19, 2016, to imprisonment for a total term of 57 months, comprised of 24 months on Count 1, which sentence was to be served consecutively to a term of 33 months for Counts 3 through 5, with the sentences for Counts 3 through 5 to be served concurrently with one another. ECF No. 59 at 2. Further, the Court ordered that the imprisonment term imposed in the instant offense “run consecutive[ly] to any sentence imposed in [the] Circuit Court, St. Louis, Missouri, under Docket Number 1222-CR05559-01.” Id.

         B. Petitioner's Direct Appeal

         A review of the docket and PACER reveals that Petitioner did not file an appeal.

         C. Motions to Vacate, Appeals Thereof, and Other Motions for Relief

         A review of the docket and PACER reveals that Petitioner did not file a motion pursuant to § 2255.

         D. Instant § 2241 Petition

         The petition itself fails to specifically articulate grounds for relief, instead directing the court to “see attachment Exhibit I, II, III, IV”. ECF No. 1 at 5. The petition does include a request for relief that Petitioner be granted “an order to compel the B.O.P. to place me back in a R[esidential] R[e-entry] C[enter] facility or alternatively on home confinement for the remainder of [her] sentence. Id. at 8. In the attachment to her petition, Petitioner argued that her prior Residential Re-entry Center (“RRC”) placement was revoked because she stayed out of her residence overnight to care for her minor child, and that in similar circumstances another prisoner was re-admitted to a RRC placement despite three violations of supervision. ECF No. 1-1 at 2 - 3, citing United States v. Hopkins, 729 Fed.Appx. 486 (8th Cir. 2018).

         On July 8, 2019, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment and a memo in support thereof. ECF Nos. 9, 10. Respondent argued that Petitioner should be denied relief because: (1) she failed to exhaust available administrative remedies; (2) a request for RRC placement or home confinement is not subject to judicial review; and (3) a petitioner has no ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.