Williams v. Bureau of Prisons

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Everett D. Williams
v. Civil No. 23-cv-509-LM-AJ
Warden, FCI Berlin
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner, Everett D. Williams, a convicted and sentenced
non-U.S. citizen, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus
under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, seeking to apply the time credits he has
earned under the First Step Act (“FSA”) to his sentence and to
be placed in “prerelease custody” (a halfway house or home
confinement) under the FSA or the Second Chance Act. Before the
court on the claims asserted in Williams’s § 2241 petition is
the Warden’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 6). Williams
has objected. Doc. No. 9.
Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
Habeas corpus review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is
appropriate if a person is “in custody in violation of the
Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28
U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). This court may adjudicate claims alleging
that the BOP has unlawfully failed to apply a prisoner’s
sentence credits or that the BOP has unlawfully delayed a
person’s transfer to a community-based custodial setting. See
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 1 of 9

2
Francis v. Maloney, 798 F.3d 33, 36 (1st Cir. 2015). Petitioner
bears the burden of proving that his continuing detention
violates his federal rights. See Espinoza v. Sabol, 558 F.3d
83, 89 (1st Cir. 2009).
Background
The court derives the following undisputed facts from the
record and matters susceptible of judicial notice. Williams is
currently serving a 324-month term of imprisonment with a five-
year term of supervision for a drug trafficking conspiracy.
Jt., United States v. Williams, No. 04-20065-cr-Seitz/013 (S.D.
Fla. Jun. 26, 2008) (ECF No. 475).
While he was at FCI Berlin, Williams filed this § 2241
petition seeking to apply FSA time credits and to be placed in
prerelease custody. The BOP then transferred Williams to FCI
Allenwood Low in Pennsylvania, where he is currently
incarcerated. See Decl. of Stephanie Scannell-Vessella (Aug.
16, 2024) ¶ 3 (Doc. No. 11-1) (“Scannell-Vessella Decl.”).
Williams is the subject of an immigration detainer. Williams is
not presently the subject of a final order of removal, and ICE
does not anticipate that Williams will become the subject of a
final order of removal prior to September 8, 2024. See BOP
Institutional Referral for CCC Placement (Doc. No. 11-2).
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 2 of 9

3
Both parties agree that by late January 2024, when the
Warden filed his motion for summary judgment, Williams had
earned a total of 365 FSA time credits towards early transfer to
supervised release and 510 credits toward prerelease custody,
for a total of 875 FSA time credits. The BOP projects
Williams’s release date to be April 15, 2026, considering all of
his good conduct time credits and 365 days of his FSA time
credits. See Decl. of Robert Rouleau (Feb. 5, 2024) ¶¶ 6, 11-13
& n.3 (Doc. No. 6-2); BOP Sentence Monitoring Computation Data
(Jan. 26, 2024) (Doc. No. 6-3). The BOP also projects
Williams’s “final statutory release date” -- based on good
conduct time credits alone (not applying any of his FSA time
credits) -- to be one year later, April 15, 2027. See id.
Approximately six months have passed since the Warden filed
the motion for summary judgment at issue here. In an updated
filing, the Warden has notified this court that the BOP
currently anticipates that Williams will have earned FSA credits
equal to the time remaining in his sentence on September 8,
2024. See Warden’s Response (Doc. No. 11), at 1. The FCI
Allenwood Warden submitted a referral package on July 15, 2024
to the appropriate BOP Residential Reentry Management Office,
recommending Williams for placement in a Residential Reentry
Center halfway house, starting on September 8, 2024, based on
the FSA and the application of his FSA time credits at that
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 3 of 9

4
time. Scannell-Vessella Decl. ¶ 4 (Doc. No. 11-1); see also
Doc. No. 11-2, at 2.
Discussion
I. Summary Judgment Standard
Summary judgment is appropriate in habeas proceedings when
“‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and . . .
the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’”
Bader v. Warden, No. 02-cv-508-JD, 2003 DNH 90, 2003 WL
21228520, at *3, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8955, at *8-9 (D.N.H. May
28, 2003) (citations omitted), aff’d, 488 F.3d 483 (1st Cir.
2007); see also Gattineri v. Wynn MA, LLC, 93 F.4th 505, 509
(1st Cir. 2024) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a)). A genuine
factual dispute exists if “the evidence is such that a
reasonable jury could resolve the point in the favor of the non-
moving party,” and a material fact is one “that has the
potential of affecting the outcome of the case.” Hamdallah v.
CPC Carolina PR, LLC, 91 F.4th 1, 16 (1st Cir. 2024) (internal
quotation marks omitted). In making that determination, the
court draws all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving
party from the properly supported facts in the record. Lech v.
von Goeler, 92 F.4th 56, 64 (1st Cir. 2024). Based on that view
of the record, the court must determine whether the moving party
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 4 of 9

5
has shown that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).
II. FSA Time Credits
Generally speaking, the FSA permits federal prisoners to
earn time credits towards early release to supervision and to
extend their placement in prerelease custody if they
successfully participate in certain programs aimed at reducing
recidivism or otherwise engage in productive activities while in
BOP custody. See 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(A), (C); Komando v.
Luna, No. 22-cv-425-SE, 2023 WL 310580, at *4, 2023 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 11477, at *7-8 (D.N.H. Jan. 13, 2023), R&R approved, 2023
WL 1782034, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19054 (D.N.H. Feb. 6, 2023).
A prisoner who has earned time credits is not entitled to
automatically apply those credits. One precondition relevant
here is that prisoners who have not yet earned FSA time credits
“in an amount that is equal to the remainder of the prisoner’s
imposed term of imprisonment” are ineligible for the application
of any of their FSA time credits. 18 U.S.C. § 3624(g)(1)(A).
As of January 27, 2024, shortly before the Warden filed his
summary judgment motion, Williams had earned a total of 875 FSA
time credits. At that time, Williams still had 1174 days
remaining in his term of imprisonment, which represents the
number of days between January 27, 2024 and April 15, 2027,
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 5 of 9

6
Williams’s projected release date based on good conduct time,
without applying any FSA time credits. On that date, and on the
dates preceding it, including when Williams filed this § 2241
petition, he was not yet eligible for the application of any FSA
time credits. Put differently, the BOP had not failed to
perform any duty with respect to the application of Williams’s
FSA time credits. See 18 U.S.C. § 3624(g)(1)(A).
Approximately six months have passed since the Warden filed
his motion, and Williams has continued to earn FSA time credits
at FCI Allenwood Low. The BOP currently projects that Williams
will have earned FSA credits equal to the time remaining in his
sentence on or about September 8, 2024, a date that is
approximately three weeks from this date. See Warden’s Response
(Doc. No. 11), at 1. Consistent with that projection, the BOP
has provided records showing that the FCI Allenwood Warden has
referred Williams for placement in a Residential Reentry Center
on September 8, 2024, based on the FSA. Scannell-Vessella Decl.
¶ 4 (Doc. No. 11-1); see also Doc. No. 11-2, at 2.
Williams has not asked for any relief in this § 2241
petition other than the application of FSA time credits and his
placement in prerelease custody. This court cannot grant
further relief upon the record before it. The record here
provides two bases for granting the Warden’s motion for summary
judgment:
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 6 of 9

7
(1) Williams’s ineligibility for the application of
any FSA time credits at all times relevant to his
litigation of this § 2241 petition, up to and including the
date of this Report and Recommendation; and
(2) the information in the record showing that the BOP
has already taken steps to effect Williams’s transfer to a
prerelease custody placement starting on September 8, 2024,
the date when his FSA time credits are projected to equal
the time remaining in his sentence.
Williams’s placement in prerelease custody under the FSA
will render all of the claims in this § 2241 petition moot. In
light of these considerations, the district judge should grant
the Warden’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 6), without
prejudice, in a manner that will preserve Williams’s ability to
file a new petition or seek other relief where he is then
incarcerated,1 if his transfer to a prerelease custody placement
1 Williams is advised that courts generally require
petitioners to exhaust their administrative remedies before filing
a § 2241 petition, or to demonstrate that an exception to the
exhaustion requirement applies. See, e.g., Rogers v. United
States, 180 F.3d 349, 358 (1st Cir. 1999); Iler-Reyes v. Warden,
FCI Berlin, No. 23-CV-553-SM-AJ, 2024 WL 1773616, at *2, 2024 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 76892, at *4 (D.N.H. Apr. 3, 2024), R&R adopted, 2024
WL 1770776, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74280 (D.N.H. Apr. 24, 2024).
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 7 of 9

8
under the FSA does not occur on or about September 8, 2024, and
if he otherwise satisfies the prerequisites to such relief.2
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the district judge should grant
the Warden’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 6) without
prejudice, so that Williams may seek appropriate relief where he
is currently incarcerated, if he is not transferred to a
prerelease custody placement on or about September 8, 2024. Any
objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed
within fourteen days of receipt of this notice. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72(b)(2). The fourteen-day period may be extended upon
motion. Only those issues raised in the objection(s) to this
Report and Recommendation are subject to review in the district
court. See Sch. Union No. 37 v. United Nat’l Ins. Co., 617 F.3d
554, 564 (1st Cir. 2010). Any issues not preserved by such
objection(s) are precluded on appeal. See id. Failure to file
specific written objections to the Report and Recommendation
within the specified time waives the right to appeal the
2 The Warden argues that Williams’s Second Chance Act claims
are unavailing for reasons set forth in the Warden’s motion for
summary judgment. See Doc. No. 6, at 3-4. This court need not
express any opinion addressing those Second Chance Act issues to
resolve this petition as specified above.
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 8 of 9

9
district court’s order. See Santos-Santos v. Torres-Centeno,
842 F.3d 163, 168 (1st Cir. 2016).
__________________________
Andrea K. Johnstone
United States Magistrate Judge
August 22, 2024
cc: Everett D. Williams, pro se
Heather A. Cherniske, Esq.
Case 1:23-cv-00509-LM-AJ Document 12 Filed 08/22/24 Page 9 of 9