Castillo-DeLeon v. Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons - BOP Central Office, No. 4:2012cv00186 - Document 10 (N.D. Ohio 2012)

Court Description: Order The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is granted in part, to the extent that Castillo-DeLeon shall be entitled to 561 days of jail-time credit. As set forth in the Court's 9/24/2012 Memorandum of Opinion and Order, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is otherwise dismissed. A hearing on the matter is not necessary. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 10/30/2012. (S,L)

Download PDF
Castillo-DeLeon v. Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons - BOP Central Office Doc. 10 (4:12cv00186) PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JAVIER CASTILLO-DeLEON, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:12CV00186 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON ORDER Before the Court is pro se Petitioner Javier Castillo-DeLeon’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1. The Court initially reviewed the matter and dismissed the Petition, in part, vis-a-vis a Memorandum of Opinion and Order1 filed on September 24, 2012. ECF No. 4. Specifically, the Court rejected Castillo-DeLeon’s claims that: (1) he is entitled to 18 U.S.C. § 3585 credit for the period in which he was also credited for the service of his state probation violation sentence (ECF No. 4 at 5-6); (2) his sentence commencement date should be January 2, 2009, the date he was taken into official custody, instead of August 31, 2010, the date he was sentenced (ECF No. 4 at 6-7); and (3) he is entitled to a nunc pro tunc designation for partial service of his federal sentence. ECF No. 4 at 7-8. With respect to Castillo-DeLeon’s remaining claim, namely, that he was improperly awarded only 365 days of jail-time credit even though National Inmate Appeals Administrator Harrell Watts had determined he was entitled to § 3585 credit for the period from February 16, 2009, to August 30, 1 The September 24, 2012 Memorandum of Opinion and Order contains a recitation of the relevant procedural facts at ECF No. 4 at 2-4. Dockets.Justia.com (4:12cv00186) 2010 (ECF No. 4 at 4), the Court ordered Respondent to show cause why a Writ of Habeas Corpus should not consequently issue. ECF No. 4 at 8-9. On October 29, 2012, Respondent filed a Response together with the declaration of Dennis Melick, a management analyst at the Designation and Sentence Computation Center located in Grand Prairie, Texas. ECF Nos. 9 and 9-1. Respondent acknowledged that it had made an error in the computation of Castillo-DeLeon’s jail-time credit. Respondent stated that Appeals Administrator Watts indeed had determined that Castillo-DeLeon was entitled to credit from February 16, 2009, to August 30, 2010, and, therefore, Watts and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) incorrectly indicated that Castillo-DeLeon was entitled to only 365 days of credit. ECF No. 9 at 6. Consequently, Respondent takes the position that the Petition should be granted, in part, to allow Castillo-DeLeon to receive 561 days of jail-time credit. ECF No. 9 at 6. Based on the foregoing, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED IN PART, to the extent that Castillo-DeLeon shall be entitled to 561 days of jail-time credit. As set forth in the Court’s September 24, 2012 Memorandum of Opinion and Order, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is otherwise DISMISSED. A hearing on the matter is not necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED. October 30, 2012 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge 2

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.