Bruce v. Warden

Background

Calvin Bruce, who was incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Sandstone, Minnesota, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He challenged a sentencing enhancement imposed by the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin after his conviction for possessing cocaine with intent to distribute. The respondent was the Warden, FCI Sandstone.

A United States magistrate judge recommended dismissing the petition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court lacked legal authority to decide the petition. Bruce objected to that recommendation. The respondent filed a response, and the court considered both submissions even though they were filed late.

Court’s Analysis

A federal prisoner generally must challenge the imposition of a sentence in the court where the sentence was imposed, ordinarily through a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. A prisoner may use § 2241 in the district where the prisoner is incarcerated only if the usual § 2255 process is inadequate or ineffective. A new or retroactive legal rule may sometimes support that exception.

Bruce argued that the Supreme Court’s decisions in Mathis v. United States and Descamps v. United States were new, retroactive rules that allowed his § 2241 petition to proceed in Minnesota. The court rejected that argument. It explained that Mathis stated it was applying precedent that had existed for more than 25 years, and that the Eighth Circuit had held that Descamps did not establish a new or retroactive rule of law.

Disposition

The court overruled Bruce’s objections, adopted the April 20, 2018 Report and Recommendation, and dismissed Bruce’s § 2241 petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The order directed that judgment be entered accordingly.