IVAN GONZALEZ, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
PER CURIAM: This appeal concerns denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus because petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.
We affirm. Petitioner Ivan Gonzalez was convicted on one count of possession with intent to distribute three kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
On December 29, 1988 he was sentenced pursuant to pre-guidelines law to five years imprisonment and four years of supervised release. The U.S. Parole Commission calculated a presumptive parole date of May 30, 1990. The U.S. Bureau of Prisons did not, however, release petitioner on this date, and he remains incarcerated.
In February 1991 Gonzalez filed in the district court a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He asserted that because his presumptive release date had passed, he need not exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking relief from the district court. Courts have original jurisdiction over imposition of a sentence. The Bureau of Prisons is, however, responsible for computing that sentence and applying appropriate good time credit. U.S. v. Martinez, 837 F. 2d 861, 865-66 (9th Cir.1988). The Bureau of Prisons has established regulations that set forth the procedures that a prisoner must follow before seeking relief from a district court. U.S. v. Lucas, 898 F. 2d 1554, 1556 (11th Cir.1990). Exhaustion of administrative remedies is jurisdictional. Id.
Petitioner relies upon cases in which the court resentenced a defendant. Those cases do not deal with computation of sentences by administrative agencies. See e.g., U.S. v. Whittington, 918 F. 2d 149 (11th Cir.1990); U.S. v. Jones, 722 F. 2d 632 (11th Cir.1983). AFFIRMED. . Gonzalez appealed his conviction, challenging the district court’s denial of his request for a supplemental jury instruction. He did not challenge his sentence.
This court affirmed the conviction. U.S. v. Gonzalez, 886 F. 2d 1324 (11th Cir. Aug. 28, 1989).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Santiago-Lugo v. Warden, 785 F.3d 467 (11th Cir. 2015)…s claim. The district court reached the opposite conclusion by relying on five decisions from this Court. See Skinner v. Wiley, 355 F. 3d 1293, 1295 (11th Cir.2004); Winck v. England, 327 F. 3d 1296, 1306 (11th Cir.2003); Gonzalez v. United States, 959 F. 2d 211, 212 (11th Cir.1992); United States v. Lucas, 898 F. 2d 1554, 1555 (11th Cir.1990); United States v. Mitchell, 845 F. 2d 951, 952 (11th Cir.1988). Of those five decisions, only our opinion in Gonzalez actually held that failure to exhaust administ…
-
United States v. Williams, 425 F.3d 987 (11th Cir. 2005)…or time served is brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 after the exhaustion of administrative remedies.” United States v. Nyhuis, 211 F. 3d 1340, 1345 (11th Cir.2000). “Exhaustion of administrative remedies is jurisdictional.” Gonzalez v. United States, 959 F. 2d 211, 212 (11th Cir.1992) (addressing denial of a § 2241 petition). After reviewing the record, we conclude that Williams has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Until Williams exhausts his administrative remedies, this issue is not ripe for…
-
BOZ v. United States, 248 F.3d 1299 (11th Cir. 2001)…52(b)(9) removes the district court’s jurisdiction to hear Boz’s appeal. The district court did not have jurisdiction to hear Boz’s petition because Boz has not exhausted the administrative remedies available to him. See Gonzalez v. United States, 959 F. 2d 211, 212 (11th Cir.1992) (“Exhaustion of administrative remedies is jurisdictional.”). “The general rule is that a challenge to agency actions in the courts must occur after available administrative remedies have been pursued.” Haitian Refugee Ctr., In…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Jones, 722 F.2d 632 (11th Cir. 1983)
- United States v. Lucas, 898 F.2d 1554 (11th Cir. 1990)
- United States v. Martinez, 837 F.2d 861 (9th Cir. 1988)
- United States v. Whittington, 918 F.2d 149 (11th Cir. 1990)