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.

Thomas James Harrell v. Charles Daniels

July 27, 2011

THOMAS JAMES HARRELL, PETITIONER,
v.
CHARLES DANIELS, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

On April 27, 1998, Petitioner was sentenced in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina to a term of 106 months of incarceration, for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2114 and 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). (See Pet'r's Petition, Ex. A.) He is currently in custody of the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") serving his federal sentence. Petitioner has a projected release date, via good conduct time release, of January 11, 2013. (See Resp't's Answer, Ex. 2, Public Inmate Information Data.)

Petitioner filed the instant federal petition for writ of habeas corpus on June 24, 2010. He contends his federal sentence is void because the U.S. Marshals Service failed to perform its duty, and relinquished all rights, by returning Petitioner to the custody of the State of North Carolina after federal sentencing. He seeks immediate release and compensation for damages.

Respondent filed an answer to the petition on May 19, 2011. Petitioner filed a traverse on July 11, 2011.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND*fn1

Petitioner was initially arrested by state authorities in Pitt County, Greenville, North Carolina, on July 25, 1997, on charges of robbery and attempted armed robbery. He was under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State of North Carolina.

On October 10, 1997, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina issued a Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Prosequendum for production of Petitioner's person before the district court to answer to charges contained in an indictment in Case No. 4:97CV00023-001. The U.S. Marshals Service removed Petitioner from the Pitt County Jail pursuant to the writ on October 22, 1997. After appearance in the district court, Petitioner was returned to Pitt County Jail on the same date.

On December 8, 1997, a second Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Prosequendum was issued by the district court for production of Petitioner's person before the district court for arraignment on December 15, 1997, on his pending federal charges. On December 9, 1997, the U.S. Marshals Service removed Petitioner from the Wilson County Jail pursuant to the writ. On December 16, 1997, he was returned to state custody at the Wilson County Jail.

On Federal 11, 1998, a third Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Prosequendum was issued by the district court for production of Petitioner's person for a psychological evaluation ordered by the district court. On April 27, 1998, Petitioner pleaded guilty to his federal charges and was sentenced to a total term of 106 months in federal prison. On May 8, 1998, Petitioner was returned to state custody at the Wilson County Jail in satisfaction of the federal writ.

On August 6, 1998, Petitioner was sentenced by the state court in Pitt County, North Carolina to a minimum term of 61 months and a maximum term of 83 months. He was given credit for 376 days of incarceration. He then began serving his state sentence.

On March 29, 2001, the United States Marshals Service lodged a detainer against

Petitioner with the North Carolina Department of Corrections.

On January 29, 2005, Petitioner was paroled from his state sentence and released to the U.S. Marshals Service pursuant to the detainer. He was placed in the primary and exclusive custody of the federal government, and ...


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.