Sanchez v. Warden
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-01251
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 18
In Sanchez v. Warden, Chief Judge Swain ordered Sanchez to submit a proper petition and fee application before pursuing First Step Act relief.
Willy Sanchez, who was required to submit a proper Section 2241 petition and filing-fee materials to continue pursuing First Step Act relief; the warden was not required to answer at this stage.
What happened
In Sanchez v. Warden, Willy Sanchez sought relief under the First Step Act based on possible sentence-related benefits. The court had not received a completed petition or the required filing-fee materials.
The court explained that a petition under Section 2241 is the proper way to challenge the Bureau of Prisons’ calculation of earned time credits, but it made no decision about Sanchez’s eligibility. It also said that a petition concerning his confinement should generally be filed in the federal district where he is incarcerated, which the order identified as the Northern District of West Virginia.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered Sanchez, within 30 days, either to pay the $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying it, and to complete and sign the attached Section 2241 petition. If he does not comply, the action will be dismissed; the order also states that if he does not wish to pursue relief, the case will be dismissed without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Sanchez v. Warden · No. 1:24-cv-01251
- Laura Swain
- May 1, 2024
Background
Willy Sanchez sent a letter seeking relief connected to Amendment 821 and the First Step Act. In an earlier order in his criminal case, Judge Kimba M. Wood treated the letter as a request to reduce Sanchez’s sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), found him ineligible for that reduction, denied his request for counsel, and directed that his First Step Act request be opened as a new civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The court then ordered Sanchez to either pay the $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying the fee, and to complete and sign a Section 2241 petition. Sanchez instead filed a motion asking the court to explain more specifically which First Step Act grounds qualified for relief.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that the First Step Act permits an eligible prisoner who completes qualifying programming or activities and is determined to have a minimum or low risk of reoffending to earn time credits. A challenge to the Bureau of Prisons’ calculation of those credits must be brought through a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, which is a procedure for challenging the way a person’s custody or sentence is being carried out.
The court expressly made no determination about Sanchez’s eligibility for First Step Act relief. It also stated that it could not advise him about which grounds to raise in a future petition. The court found that his submission did not provide the facts required for a Section 2241 petition, including facts about his commitment or detention, the identity of his custodian, and why he believed he was entitled to relief.
The court further explained that a Section 2241 petition challenging physical confinement generally belongs in the federal district where the petitioner is confined. Because the order states that Sanchez was incarcerated at FCI Hazelton in West Virginia, it said that the Northern District of West Virginia was the proper district and that a petition filed in the Southern District of New York would likely be transferred there.
Order and effect
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed Sanchez, within 30 days, to pay the $5 fee or submit the attached application to proceed without prepaying it, and to complete, sign, and return the attached Section 2241 petition. No response from the warden was required at that stage. The order states that if Sanchez does not wish to pursue First Step Act relief, he need not respond and the case will be dismissed without prejudice; its conclusion also states that the action will be dismissed if he fails to comply within the allowed time. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying the appellate filing fees.
Read the full 18-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.