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.

Jose Mora v. Warden

December 12, 2011

JOSE MORA, PETITIONER,
v.
WARDEN, FCC COLEMAN - LOW, RESPONDENT.



ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Jose Mora's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. #1) filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Supplement to Petition (Dkt. #8), Second Supplement to Petition (Dkt. #10), and Respondent's Response (Dkt. #12). Mora has not filed a Reply. Upon consideration, the Court concludes that the Petition should be denied.

Mora claims the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") has labeled him a sex offender based on false information contained in his presentence investigation report. He says this label has caused him "psychological harm" in violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, and has caused him to be ineligible to go to a camp setting. Mora's petition (Dkt. #1), p. 4.

The classification of inmates falls within BOP discretion. This includes the designation of confinement. A prisoner has no right to remain or be transferred to any particular prison facility. Montayne v. Haynes, 427 U.S. 236 (1976). Even though the petition could be denied on this basis alone, the Court has investigated Mora's claims about the accuracy of his presentence investigation report.

The Court requested the Probation Office for the Eastern District of Virginia to respond to Mora's claims about the factual statements in paragraphs 43 and 44 of the presentence investigation report. The Probation Office responded on December 5, 2011. Said response will be filed under seal in the Court file. A copy will be mailed to Petitioner for his reference as well as to counsel of record. Contrary to Mora's contentions, the presentence investigation report merely states the facts that were reported to the Probation Office. It lists two separate reports and states the allegations of the reports. It does not claim that these incidents resulted in convictions. What the BOP does with this reported information is within the sound discretion of the BOP.

For the foregoing reasons, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. #1) is DENIED.

2. The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in favor of Respondent and against Petitioner.

3. All pending motions are denied as moot.

4. The Clerk is directed to close this file.

Copies furnished to: Counsel/Parties of Record

20111212

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...

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.