Warden

(HC) Briones-Pereyra v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 26, 20241:23-cv-01718California896 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 JORGE BRIONES-PEREYRA, Case No. 1:23-cv-01718-SAB-HC

12 Petitioner, ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO

SHOW CAUSE

13 v. (ECF No. 5) 14 WARDEN,

15 Respondent.

16 17 Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On December 21, 2023, the Court ordered Petitioner to show 19 cause why the petition should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 20 (ECF No. 5.) On January 4, 2024, Petitioner filed a response. (ECF No. 7.) 21 In the petition, Petitioner challenges a Federal Bureau of Prisons’ policy (Program 22 Statement 5410.01) that excludes inmates with immigration detainers, such as Petitioner, from 23 applying their First Step Act (“FSA”) Earned Time Credits (“FTCs”). (ECF No. 1 at 6.1) The 24 petition also states that “[a]ny appeal to BOP policy would be futile” because the petition 25 concerns “a legal question of law.” (Id. at 7.) 26 On November 18, 2022, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) …

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.