Plasa v. Spray
- Nancy Brasel
- 0:21-cv-00933
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 5
In Michael R. Plasa v. Steve Kallis, Judge Brasel dismissed Plasa’s habeas petition, ruling that credits from his initial sentence could not reduce his revocation sentence.
Michael R. Plasa, whose request to apply good-conduct credits from his initial sentence to his supervised-release-revocation sentence was rejected.
What happened
Michael R. Plasa, an inmate at Federal Medical Center–Rochester, asked the court to require the Bureau of Prisons to reduce his nine-month sentence for supervised-release violations by 88 days of good-conduct credits earned during an earlier sentence. A magistrate judge recommended denying and dismissing the petition, and Plasa objected.
The court rejected Plasa’s six objections. It ruled that his initial sentence and his later revocation sentence were separate, so good-conduct credits earned during the initial sentence could not be applied to the revocation sentence. The court also ruled that it could not award him money for those credits.
Judge Nancy E. Brasel overruled the objection, accepted the recommendation, and dismissed the petition. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Plasa v. Spray · No. 0:21-cv-00933
- Nancy Brasel
- June 29, 2021
Background
Michael R. Plasa, an inmate at Federal Medical Center–Rochester, was serving a nine-month term of imprisonment for violations of supervised release. He filed a petition asking the court to direct the Federal Bureau of Prisons to reduce that sentence by 88 days of good-conduct-time credits that he earned while serving his initial sentence.
A magistrate judge recommended denying and dismissing the petition. Plasa objected to the recommendation. Because he was representing himself, the court read his objection liberally. The court reviewed the portions of the recommendation that he challenged independently and reviewed the remaining portions for clear error.
Court’s analysis
The court addressed six objections. It agreed with the recommendation’s analysis of Plasa’s challenge to the application of his good-conduct credits, regardless of whether the request was described as challenging their calculation or application.
Plasa also asked for the monetary value of the credits if they could not be applied to his sentence. The court held that he identified no authority allowing that relief and that the court could not grant a monetary award for previously earned good-conduct credits. The court also rejected objections concerning the wording used to describe the First Step Act and another objection that it characterized as semantic.
The court treated the application of previously earned credits as the only substantive issue. It held that Plasa’s initial sentence and his sentences imposed after supervised-release revocation were separate and distinct for purposes of good-conduct credits. Therefore, credits earned during the initial sentence could not be carried over and applied to the current revocation sentence. The court also rejected Plasa’s argument that the initial sentence continued until his release from the current incarceration, stating that the initial sentence had ended.
Disposition
The court overruled Plasa’s objection, accepted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, and dismissed the petition. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.
Judge
The order was signed by Nancy E. Brasel, United States District Judge.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.