Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    Ronnie Lee Alston appealed two district court rulings that denied him habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Fourth Circuit affirmed both rulings, finding that Alston was not denied due process in two disciplinary hearings at FCI Butner and that his transfer from FCI Lexington did not deny him access to courts. The court also noted that the Attorney General has discretion to transfer prisoners between facilities and that any challenge to his guilty plea would need to be brought through a § 2255 motion in the sentencing court, not a § 2241 petition. Both district court rulings were affirmed.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1989-09-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 885 F.2d 864 Docket: 88-7749

    Original Title

    Ronnie Lee Alston v. Sam Samples, Warden, W.S. Willingham, Ronnie Lee Alston v. Sam Samples, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, 885 F.2d 864, 4th Cir. (1989)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Ronnie Lee Alston appealed two district court rulings that denied him habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Fourth Circuit affirmed both rulings, finding that Alston was not denied due process in two disciplinary hearings at FCI Butner and that his transfer from FCI Lexington did not deny him access to courts. The court also noted that the Attorney General has discretion to transfer prisoners between facilities and that any challenge to his guilty plea would need to be brought through a § 2255 motion in the sentencing court, not a § 2241 petition. Both district court rulings were affirmed.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    5 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ronnie Lee Alston appealed two district court rulings that denied him habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Fourth Circuit affirmed both rulings, finding that Alston was not denied due process in two disciplinary hearings at FCI Butner and that his transfer from FCI Lexington did not deny him access to courts. The court also noted that the Attorney General has discretion to transfer prisoners between facilities and that any challenge to his guilty plea would need to be brought through a § 2255 motion in the sentencing court, not a § 2241 petition. Both district court rulings were affirmed.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    885 F.

    2d 864
    Unpublished Disposition

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Ronnie Lee ALSTON, Petitioner-Appellant,
    v.
    Sam SAMPLES, Warden, W.S. Willingham, RespondentsAppellees.
    Ronnie Lee ALSTON, Petitioner-Appellant,
    v.
    Sam SAMPLES, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution,
    Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 88-7749.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted May 26, 1989.
    Decided Sept. 13, 1989.

    Ronnie Lee Alston, appellant pro se.


    James Gordon Carpenter, Office of the United States Attorney, for
    appellee.
    Before SPROUSE and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Ronnie Lee Alston appeals from two judgments of the district court, each
    refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241. We affirm. Our
    review of the records in both cases discloses that Alston was not denied due
    process in the two disciplinary hearings he received at the Federal Correctional

    Institution in Butner, North Carolina. The claim that his transfer from the
    Federal Correctional Institution in Lexington, Kentucky, denied him access to
    the courts is without merit; the district court in the Eastern District of Kentucky
    retained jurisdiction over the habeas corpus petition he had filed there.
    Santillanes v. U.S. Parole Commission, 754 F.2d 887, 888 (10th Cir.1985). The
    Attorney General may in his discretion transfer prisoners within the federal
    prison system at any time. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 4082(b); Brown-Bey v. United
    States, 720 F.2d 467 (7th Cir.1983). If Alston is attempting to attack the
    validity of his guilty plea on the ground that confinement at FCI-Lexington was
    a term of his plea agreement, that claim cannot be maintained under Sec. 2241,
    but must be brought in a motion filed under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 in the
    sentencing court.
    2

    Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the district court. We dispense with


    oral argument because the dispositive issues have recently been decided
    authoritatively.

    No. 88-7749--AFFIRMED.

    No. 88-7750--AFFIRMED.

    You might also like