Spang v. Eischen

Background

Thomas Spang, who was representing himself, was serving a federal sentence at the Federal Prison Camp in Duluth, Minnesota. Wyoming took him into custody on March 30, 2017, after a state conviction. The federal court in Montana later sentenced him to 87 months in prison, to run at the same time as his state sentence. Spang remained in federal custody from his federal sentencing until May 4, 2018, when he returned to Wyoming’s custody. The Marshals Service took him back into custody on January 28, 2022, after his Wyoming sentence was satisfied, and he arrived at the Duluth facility on March 22, 2022.

The Bureau of Prisons determined that Spang was eligible for credits under the First Step Act and awarded him 15 days of those credits. Spang filed this petition asking the court to require a calculation that included time spent in Wyoming and to require immediate use of the credits. He also challenged the application of his good-conduct credits and sought immediate transfer to home confinement.

Review of the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a report and recommendation on January 26, 2023. Spang objected. Judge Wright reviewed the portions of the recommendation that Spang challenged in detail and reviewed the remaining portions for clear error. The court did not consider attachments or factual statements that Spang had not presented to the magistrate judge.

First Step Act Credits

The court held that Spang was not entitled to First Step Act earned-time credits for any time before December 21, 2018, the date the Act was enacted. The statute bars credits for qualifying programming completed before that date.

The court also held that Spang could not earn First Step Act credits for the period after December 21, 2018, but before his arrival at the official facility where he would serve his federal sentence. According to the court, Spang became eligible to participate in qualifying programs and activities when he arrived at the Duluth facility on March 22, 2022. The court found that the Bureau of Prisons had properly calculated his credits and denied relief based on Spang’s request for an earlier calculation.

Good-Conduct Credits

Spang argued that the Bureau of Prisons had incorrectly applied his good-conduct credits. The court explained that a prisoner may receive up to 54 days of credit for each year of a qualifying sentence, subject to the Bureau of Prisons’ determination that the prisoner complied with institutional rules. The court also explained that a prisoner does not have a right to use those credits until release from custody.

Spang’s records, calculated as of May 23, 2022, projected that he could earn 364 days of good-conduct credit and showed that he had already earned 216 days. The court concluded that he could not immediately apply those days and was not entitled to relief on this claim.

Home Confinement

The court rejected Spang’s request for immediate home confinement for two reasons. First, the request depended on his unsuccessful arguments for recalculating and immediately applying his credits. Second, the court held that a petition challenging imprisonment cannot be used to challenge the place or conditions of imprisonment. Such a petition may challenge the fact or duration of imprisonment, but not a request to change the place of confinement to home confinement.

Disposition

Judge Wright overruled Spang’s objections, adopted the January 26, 2023 report and recommendation, denied Spang’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and dismissed the action without prejudice.