Chocon-Gomez v. King
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:24-cv-02737
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 8
In Chocon-Gomez v. King, Judge Menendez denied Franklin Alizandro Chocon-Gomez’s release petition because a removal order barred his earned credits.
Franklin Alizandro Chocon-Gomez, whose request to apply First Step Act earned time credits to shorten his sentence was denied.
What happened
In Chocon-Gomez v. King, Franklin Alizandro Chocon-Gomez asked the court to apply earned prison-time credits under the First Step Act and release him earlier. He argued that applying the credits would have ended his prison term in July 2024.
The court found that he was subject to a final order of removal issued on July 18, 2016. Because federal law makes prisoners with final removal orders ineligible to use these credits to shorten their sentences, the court rejected his arguments about the order’s service date, authenticity, and the Bureau of Prisons’ timing.
Judge Menendez accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendation, overruled Chocon-Gomez’s objections, denied his petition, and dismissed the matter with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Chocon-Gomez v. King · No. 0:24-cv-02737
- Katherine Menendez
- Jan. 24, 2025
Background
Franklin Alizandro Chocon-Gomez filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. A habeas petition is a request for a court order requiring a person’s custody to comply with federal law. Chocon-Gomez sought application of earned time credits under the First Step Act of 2018, arguing that the credits would have shortened his sentence and that his prison term would have ended in July 2024.
Chocon-Gomez is a citizen of Guatemala and is subject to a final order of removal from the United States. The Bureau of Prisons records showed a projected release date in early July 2025 because the credits were not applied. Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung recommended denying the petition. Chocon-Gomez objected, and the court reviewed the recommendation independently.
Court’s analysis
The court relied on 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(E)(i), which makes a prisoner ineligible to apply First Step Act time credits if the prisoner is subject to a final order of removal. The court concluded that Chocon-Gomez had been subject to such an order since July 18, 2016, when an immigration officer determined that he was inadmissible and ordered him removed under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1). The court found that the order was effective before Chocon-Gomez was personally served with a copy on July 30, 2024.
The court rejected Chocon-Gomez’s argument that the Bureau of Prisons unlawfully refused to apply credits before he received the order. It also ruled that, even if he had earned credits before the removal order became final, the statute would still make him ineligible to apply them to shorten his sentence. The court found the copy of the removal order adequately authenticated by a Bureau of Prisons official.
The court also held that Chocon-Gomez could not use this habeas proceeding to challenge the legality of the removal order because the district court lacked jurisdiction over that challenge. Under the cited immigration law, a challenge to a final removal order must be considered by the appropriate court of appeals. The court further agreed that an evidentiary hearing was unnecessary.
Disposition
The court accepted the Report and Recommendation, overruled Chocon-Gomez’s objections, denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and dismissed the matter with prejudice. The court entered those rulings in an order signed by Judge Katherine Menendez.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.