Sinek v. United States

Background

Charles R. Sinek filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging the execution of his federal sentence. He was serving supervised release and argued that time credits earned under the First Step Act should reduce that term. Sinek filed the petition without a lawyer.

In 2018, Judge Sharpe of the Northern District of New York sentenced Sinek to 87 months in prison and three years of supervised release after his conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance. Sinek entered Bureau of Prisons custody in August 2018 and moved to a residential reentry center in January 2021.

According to the Bureau of Prisons, Sinek had earned 510 First Step Act time credits. In January 2022, the Bureau applied 365 credits to move his release from prison to August 16, 2022, when he began supervised release. The remaining 145 credits were not applied. In his petition, Sinek claimed that he was owed more than 20 months of credits to reduce his supervised-release term.

The parties’ positions

Sinek argued that 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(C), which says earned credits “shall be applied toward time in prerelease custody or supervised release,” required the Bureau to apply the unused credits directly to his supervised-release term. He relied on a decision that adopted that interpretation.

The United States argued that the petition was moot because the Bureau had applied all credits that could be used. Alternatively, it argued that the First Step Act does not permit credits to shorten a supervised-release term. The court noted that the government did not provide a mootness analysis and therefore addressed the merits. The court also stated that exhaustion of administrative remedies was not at issue.

Court’s analysis

The court found that the word “toward” could reasonably mean either directly reducing the length of supervised release or moving the prisoner closer to beginning supervised release. Reading the provision together with 18 U.S.C. § 3624(g), the court adopted the second interpretation.

The court explained that the statutory scheme allows earned credits to reduce a person’s imprisonment term so the Bureau can transfer the person to prerelease custody or allow the person to begin supervised release earlier. Section 3624(g)(3) permits an earlier start to supervised release based on credits, up to 12 months. But, in the court’s view, neither the First Step Act nor the related provisions authorize the Bureau to reduce the supervised-release term imposed by the sentencing court. The court also noted that the First Step Act did not amend 18 U.S.C. § 3583, which governs changes to supervised release.

Disposition

The court concluded that First Step Act time credits cannot be applied to reduce a term of supervised release. It found that the Bureau appeared to have applied the maximum number of credits permitted to change Sinek’s release date and that credits beyond the number used for that purpose could not reduce his supervised release. The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and directed the Clerk to close the file.