The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS [Doc. 1]
Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
On March 11, 1999, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) released Petitioner via Mandatory Release for Armed Bank Robbery following the imposition of his sentence in 1985. Petitioner's conviction occurred prior to the implementation of the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA).
On November 28, 2000, while still on parole, Petitioner committed an additional Armed Bank Robbery, in addition to other related offenses. This offense occurred after the implementation of the SRA-which is commonly referred to as the "new law" case. See Farrar Declaration ¶ 4, Attachment Three.
On April 13, 2001, the United States Parole Commission (USPC) issued a warrant for a mandatory release violation because of Petitioner's new offenses. Id. ¶ 5, Attachment Four.
On January 25, 2002, the United States District Court, District of Nevada, sentenced Petitioner to a 123-month term for Armed Bank Robbery, Aiding and Abetting, and Use of a Firearm During and in Relation to a Crime of Violence. Id. at ¶ 6, Attachment Five.
On December 15, 2009, Petitioner was released from his 2002 sentence via Good Conduct Time. Id. at ¶ 7, Attachment Six. However, he remained in custody based on the detainer and further action by the USPC. Id. at ¶ 8, Attachment Seven.
On March 9, 2010, the USPC issued a Notice of Action concerning the Petitioner's mandatory release violation. The USPC directed the BOP to commence the mandatory release term on December 15, 2009. Id. at ¶ 9, Attachment Eight.
A parole revocation hearing was conducted on March 25, 2010, and on April 21, 2010, a Notice of Action was issued finding Petitioner violated the terms of his release. Petitioner's mandatory release was revoked and directed he be re-paroled effective July 6, 2010. Id. at ¶ 10, Attachment Nine. The BOP updated the computation of Petitioner's sentence. Id. at ¶ 11, Attachment Ten.
In the instant petition, Petitioner contends that he did not receive a timely parole revocation hearing or any good time credits toward his sentence. Respondent filed an answer to the petition on May 21, 2010, and Petitioner filed a traverse on June 11, 2010.
I. Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Venue
Writ of habeas corpus relief extends to a person in custody under the authority of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Writ of habeas corpus relief is available if a federal prisoner can show he is "in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). Whether the Court has subject matter to hear Petitioner's claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 will be discussed below. In addition, pursuant to § 2241, venue is proper in this case because Petitioner was confined at the United ...