US v. Jerome Vance, No. 13-7709 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7709 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. JEROME VANCE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:11-cr-00074-RBH-1) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Circuit Judges. Judge, Decided: and HAMILTON and March 31, 2014 DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerome Vance, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jerome Vance appeals the district court s text order denying his motion to correct a sentencing error. Vance asserts that the district court erred On appeal, in denying his motion because he was promised at sentencing credit for pretrial incarceration. Vance claims that the Bureau of Prisons ( BOP ) miscalculated his credit for pretrial detention and requests a correction. Finding no error, we affirm. A defendant shall be given credit toward the service of a term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the sentence commences . . . . U.S.C. § 3585(b) (2012). permit a district court 18 Section 3585(b), however, does not to determine credit at sentencing. United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 334 (1992). Rather, only the may Attorney sentencing challenge General, credit. the acting Id. BOP s at through 334-35. computation or the A BOP, prisoner execution of compute wishing a to federal sentence may do so via a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 confinement remedies. U.S.C. § 2241 following (2012), exhaustion in of the district available of his administrative See Garza v. Davis, 596 F.3d 1198, 1203 (10th Cir. 2010); see also Timms v. Johns, 627 F.3d 525, 531 (4th Cir. 2010) (concluding that, absent 2 exceptional circumstances, prisoners must exhaust alternative remedies before seeking federal habeas relief). Vance has presented no evidence that he has exhausted his administrative remedies, and we ascertain no error in the district court s denial of relief. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately Accordingly, we affirm. because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
