United States District Court, C.D. California
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
ALICIA G. ROSENBERG, Magistrate Judge.
On February 25, 2014, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. For the reasons discussed below, it appears the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the petition.
The court, therefore, orders Petitioner to show cause, on or before April 3, 2014, why this court should not recommend dismissal without prejudice based on lack of jurisdiction.
SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS
Petitioner is incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Lompoc, California.
On March 17, 1992, a jury in the United States District Court, Western District of Oklahoma, convicted Petitioner of one count of violating 21 U.S.C. § 846 (conspiring to possess cocaine base with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine base); two counts of violating 21 U.S.C. § 843 (using a telephone to facilitate the distribution of cocaine base); and one count of violating 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (distribution of cocaine base). U.S. v. Reed, Case No. CR-92-05-W (" Reed District Court Case "), Dkt. No. 409 at 1. The court sentenced him to 360 months in prison. Id. at 2.
On August 3, 1993, the 10th Circuit affirmed the convictions. U.S. v. Reed, 1 F.3d 1105, 1112 (10th Cir. 1993). One of the grounds on appeal was the sentence. The district court established found that the base level of the offense was predicated on Petitioner "being responsible for the sale of 216.5 grams." Reed argued it was only 103 grams. The 10th Circuit concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support 216.5 grams. Id. at 1111.
Reed challenged a "four point upward adjustment... based on the [district court]'s finding that Reed was an organizer or leader of a drug operation that involved five or more individuals." The 10th Circuit concluded that there at least six members of the conspiracy and that Reed was the leader. Id.
Reed challenged a "two point enhancement for the possession of a firearm" during one of the criminal transactions. The 10th Circuit found that there was a weapon "present" during the commission of that crime. Id.
Reed challenged "the addition of nine points to his criminal history calculation, three for a crime committed by Reed as a juvenile, and six for two crimes committed as an adult." The 10th Circuit found that the juvenile conviction could be included because Petitioner was tried as an adult. Reed argued that the three adult convictions should been collapsed into one because the sentences were concurrent. The 10th Circuit found that the district court had not erred because each of the three crimes was discrete and committed on different days. Id. at 1111-12.
On May 23, 1997, Petitioner filed a § 2255 motion, which was denied as untimely by the district court. U.S. v. Reed, 1998 WL 817750, *1 (10th Cir. Nov. 27, 1998). The 10th Circuit denied a certificate of appealability. Id. at 4. Petitioner's attempts to file a second or successive § 2255 motion in 2000 and 2001 were "rejected by the courts." U.S. v. Reed, 176 Fed.Appx. 944, 945 (10th Cir. 2006.)
In February 2008, Petitioner requested a reduction in his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines became effective on November 1, 2008,  and was made retroactive on March 3, 2008. District Court Case, Dkt. No. 409 at 3. Amendment 706 modified the drug quantity thresholds in the Drug Quantity Table. It reduced the base level by two points for defendants sentenced for crack cocaine offenses. Id. The district court denied the request because the two point downward reduction did not lower the "applicable guideline range." Id. at 5.
In 2011 Petitioner requested a reduction in his sentence to 210 months pursuant to the Fair Sentencing Act ("FSA"). The FSA "was intended to reduce the disparity between sentences involving crack and powder cocaine... [and] directed the Sentencing Commission to revise the sentencing guidelines to achieve consistency with other guideline provisions and applicable law." Id. at 6 (citation and quotation marks omitted). The court noted that Reed "qualified as a career offender, " but because "the Presentence Investigation report noted that this classification would have no practicable effect under the circumstances..., the career offender guideline was not used in calculating Reed's sentence." Id. at 2 n.1. Amendment 750 reduced the base offense level by four points, which would have given Petitioner a base offense level of 30 instead of 34. Id. at 7. However, the court found that ...