Staples v. Williamson

Opinions of the United
2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
12-21-2007
Staples v. Williamson
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 07-3146
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007
Recommended Citation
"Staples v. Williamson" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 13.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/13
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 07-3146
___________
TYRONE STAPLES,
Appellant
v.
TROY WILLIAMSON; U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
____________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Civil Action No. 06-cv-02426)
District Judge: Honorable Sylvia H. Rambo
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
December 20, 2007
Before: SLOVITER, BARRY and WEIS, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: December 21, 2007)
___________
OPINION
___________
PER CURIAM
Tyrone Staples appeals the District Court’s order denying his petition filed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The procedural history of this case and the details of
Staples’s claims are well known to the parties, set forth in the District Court’s thorough
opinion, and need not be discussed at length. Briefly, Staples was sentenced by the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to fifty-seven months
in prison based on his conviction for possession of a firearm by a felon. In his § 2241
petition, Staples argued that he was entitled to credit on his federal sentence for time
served before trial. The District Court denied the petition, and Staples filed a timely
notice of appeal.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and exercise plenary review over the
District Court’s legal conclusions. Cradle v. U.S. ex rel. Miner, 290 F.3d 536, 538 (3d
Cir. 2002). Under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), a defendant can only receive credit towards a
federal sentence for prior custody “that has not been credited against another sentence.”
Staples does not dispute that the time at issue was credited towards his state sentence.
Staples argues that he is entitled to the credit pursuant to this Court’s decision in
Ruggiano v. Reish, 307 F.3d 121 (3d Cir. 2002), because the federal sentencing court
recommended that he receive credit from the time of his arrest. However, as explained by
the District Court, the rule of Ruggiano does not apply to Staples’ sentence calculation
because Staples had not yet been sentenced on his state charges at the time of his federal
sentencing.
For the above reasons, as well as those set forth by the District Court, we will
affirm the District Court’s order.
2