Sinek

Sinek v. United States

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 16, 20245:23-cv-04352California2,184 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 CHARLES R. SINEK, Case No. 23-cv-04352-VKD

Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

13 Charles R. Sinek, who is presently serving a sentence of supervised release, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, asserting that he is entitled to time credits under the First Step Act to reduce the term of his supervised release. Dkt. No. 1 at ECF 2. Finding he stated a cognizable claim, the Court ordered Respondent to show cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not issue. Dkt. No. 5. All parties consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. See Dkt. Nos. 4, 9. On January 5, 2024, Respondent filed its answer, supported by the declaration of Daniel Painter, the Bureau of Prison’s Residential Reentry Manager (“RRM”) for the Sacramento Office. Dkt. Nos. 7, 7-1 ¶¶ 1-2. Mr. Sinek did not file a response, although…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.