Willis v. United States

Decision Date10 February 1971
Docket NumberNo. 30700.,30700.
Citation438 F.2d 923
PartiesTony WILLIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Tony Willis, pro se.

John W. Stokes, Jr., U. S. Atty., Allen I. Hirsch, Asst. U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for respondent-appellee.

Before GEWIN, GOLDBERG and DYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Willis has appealed1 from the District Court's denial of his petition to obtain credit on his federal prison sentence for certain time spent in custody prior to sentencing.2 We affirm in part and reverse in part, and remand the cause for a hearing.

Willis alleges that while he was free on bail on the federal charge, he was arrested on October 31, 1968, by Georgia state authorities. He avers that his federal bail then was revoked and bail on the state charges was precluded by the lodging of a federal detainer against him.

Willis was sentenced on the state charges on December 10, 1968, to serve a sentence running concurrently with the federal sentence which he had received on November 29, 1968. He was transferred to the United States Penitentiary to commence service of his federal (and concurrent state) sentence on December 31, 1968. Willis claims that he is entitled to credit on his federal sentence for the 61 days from October 31 to December 31, 1968.3

Clearly Willis is not entitled to credit for the period of December 10 to December 30 or 31, 1968. During that time he was actually serving his state sentence for offenses unrelated to the federal charges. Sanders v. McGuire, 5 Cir. 1968, 405 F.2d 881.

The state court purported to give Willis credit for his presentence custody from October 31 to December 10, 1968. This did not help Willis, however, because his federal sentence is due to expire more than a year after his state terms.

In previous proceedings, the District Court denied relief to Willis because the sentences being concurrent, the state already had given credit for the presentence jail time. The instant petition was denied as being a successive application for similar relief. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244.

This case is governed by our decision in Davis v. Attorney General, 5 Cir. 1970, 425 F.2d 238. There we held that if Davis "was denied release on bail because the federal detainer was lodged against him, then that was time `spent in custody in connection with the federal offense,' 18 U.S.C.A. § 3568 since the detainer was issued upon authority of the appellant's federal conviction and sentence." 425 F.2d at 240.

Accordingly the judgment of the District Court is affirmed in part and reversed in part; and the case is remanded for an evidentiary hearing on Willis' contention that he should be accorded credit on his federal sentence for his presentence...

To continue reading

Request your trial
235 cases
  • McRae v. Rios
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • April 24, 2013
    ...the date he was originally arrested by state authorities. He also contends that he is entitled to credits pursuant to Willis v. United States, 438 F.2d 923 (5th Cir. 1971). Both contentions are without merit. The authority to compute a federal prisoner's sentence is delegated to the Attorne......
  • Rios v. Wiley
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • January 4, 2000
    ...an award of "double credit" pursuant to the "Willis/Kayfez line of cases." App. at 62, 68. These statements refer to Willis v. United States, 438 F.2d 923 (5th Cir. 1971), and Kayfez v. Gaselle, 993 F.2d 1288 (7th Cir. To the extent that the district court relied on the fact that the BOP pe......
  • Rodriguez v. Shartle
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • November 4, 2012
    ...prejudice.3 Petitioner's challenges based on the holding of Barden v. Keohane, 921 F.2d 476 (3d Cir. 1991), and/or Willis v. United States, 438 F.2d 923 (5th Cir. 1971), and/or Kayfez v. Gasele, 993 F. 2d 1288 (7th Cir. 1993), that is, provided such challenges were intended, will be dismiss......
  • Ka v. Warden Bennettsville
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • September 5, 2014
    ...in opposition, Petitioner states that he is not proceeding on his nunc pro tunc designation request5 but instead argues he is entitled to a Willis credit and seekscredit toward his sentence for the time period from June 2010 through February 2012, from when he was indicted in the Western Di......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • 35-l Credit for Time Served
    • United States
    • A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual (2020 Edition) Chapter 35 Getting Out Early
    • Invalid date
    ...court, has the authority to grant prisoners credit for time served). 205. These credits are named after a case, Willis v. United States, 438 F.2d 923, 925 (5th Cir. 1971) (holding that defendant was entitled to credit for time served in state pre-sentence custody because this time was relat......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT