Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Garcia v. U.S. Parole Commission

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

March 24, 2014

MIGUEL N. GARCIA, Petitioner,
v.
U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent.

OPINION

ROBERT B. KUGLER, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner is a federal prisoner currently incarcerated at F.C.I. Fort Dix in Fort Dix, New Jersey. He is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

On November 20, 2013, the Court dismissed the habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction. On December 16, 2013, the Court received petitioner's motion to correct the caption and motion to amend/alter the judgment. Therefore, the Clerk will be ordered to reopen this case so that these motions can be considered. For the following reasons, petitioner's motion to amend the caption will be granted and his motion to amend/alter the November 20, 2013 Order will be denied.

II. BACKGROUND

Only a brief recital of the facts is necessary as the Court laid out the factual background of this case in the November 20, 2013 Opinion. In 1995, petitioner was convicted in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine and knowingly and intentionally attempting to possess with intent to distribute cocaine. Petitioner was classified as a career offender for sentencing purposes based on prior convictions and sentenced to 360 months imprisonment. Petitioner's appeal and motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 were unsuccessful. Thereafter, petitioner brought a § 2241 habeas petition in this Court arguing that a 1972 conviction should not have counted as a predicate offense for sentencing purposes. See Garcia v. Grondolsky, No. 09-0783, 2009 WL 1929319, at *1 (D.N.J. July 1, 2009), aff'd by, 350 F.Appx. 616 (3d Cir. 2009) (per curiam). The Court found that it lacked jurisdiction because petitioner had failed to establish that § 2255 was inadequate or ineffective to assert his claim. See id. at *3.

Petitioner filed the instant petition in January, 2012, arguing that his parole date for the 1972 conviction was July 13, 1980, not July 13, 1981. According to petitioner, this earlier 1980 parole date does not render his 1972 conviction within the scope of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines that classified him as a career offender.

On November 20, 2013, the Court dismissed the instant habeas petition due to a lack of jurisdiction. The Court determined that petitioner had failed to show that a § 2255 motion was inadequate or ineffective to pursue petitioner's claim.

Petitioner has now filed a motion to amend/alter the November 20, 2013 Opinion and Order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).

III. DISCUSSION

A. Motion to Amend Caption

Petitioner filed a motion to amend the name of the respondent in the caption from the United States Parole Commission to Warden J. Hollingsworth, who is the warden at F.C.I. Fort Dix. The proper respondent in this case is the custodian of petitioner, who would the warden of F.C.I. Fort Dix. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004). Therefore, the motion to amend the caption will be granted.

B. Motion for Reconsideration

i. Legal Standard for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.