United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Sergio J. Granados, Petitioner,
R. Marques, Respondent.
C. Tostrud United States District Judge
Sergio J. Granados commenced this action pro se on March 25,
2019 by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus,
requesting that the sentencing reforms of the First Step Act
of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, including the
calculation of good-time credits as provided by that Act, be
immediately applied to him. Pet. [ECF No. 1]. This matter is
before the Court on a Report and Recommendation issued by
Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright on June 26, 2019. ECF
No. 12. Magistrate Judge Wright recommended denying the
Petition without prejudice, on the grounds that the First
Step Act did not take effect until 210 days after its
enactment, see 132 Stat. at 5196, which would be
July 19, 2019. See R&R at 8, 11. Granados filed
objections to the Report and Recommendation on July 8, 2019
[ECF No. 13], and on July 10, 2019, he filed an addendum to
his objections in which he asserted that, although the Bureau
of Prisons (“BOP”) had recently purported to
calculate his good-time credit under the First Step Act, it
had done so incorrectly, shorting him by 14 days [ECF No.
13]. Respondent then filed a response that, among other
things, explained the basis for his contention that the
BOP's recalculation was correct with respect to Granados.
See ECF No. 21 at 4-5. In support of that point,
Respondent submitted a declaration and documentary evidence
further explaining the basis for the recalculation of
Granados's good-time credit. ECF No. 22.
Granados has objected, the Court is required to review the
Report and Recommendation de novo pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 72.2(b)(3). The Court has
undertaken that de novo review and has concluded that, due to
changes in circumstances-namely, the fact that the First Step
Act became effective shortly after the Report and
Recommendation was issued, and that the BOP had endeavored to
recalculate Granados's good-time credit pursuant to that
Act's requirements-the Report and Recommendation cannot
be accepted. Furthermore, because of the manner in which this
case has developed, and the fact that Respondent submitted
new evidence in support of his response to Granados's
objection, the Court construes that response as a motion for
summary judgment. In an order dated August 6, 2019, the Court
informed Granados of that fact and, pursuant to Rule 56(f) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, gave him two weeks,
until August 20, 2019, to file and serve a response to that
summary-judgment motion. ECF No. 24 at 2. Granados has made
no further filings in this case. Because there exists no
genuine issue of material fact that Granados's good-time
credit has been recalculated correctly under the applicable
law, Respondent is entitled to summary judgment.
judgment is warranted “if the movant shows that there
is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant
is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A dispute over a fact is
“material” only if its resolution “might
affect the outcome of the suit” under the governing
substantive law. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,
477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A dispute over a fact is
“genuine” only if “the evidence is such
that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the
nonmoving party.” Id. “The evidence of
the non-movant is to be believed, and all justifiable
inferences are to be drawn in [her] favor.”
Id. at 255; Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650,
10, 1996, Granados was sentenced to an aggregated term of 348
months of imprisonment and an eight-year term of supervised
release. Boldt Decl. ¶ 3 [ECF No. 22]; id. at
Ex. A [ECF No. 22-1]. His term of imprisonment was later
reduced to 336 months. Id. At the time Granados
filed his Petition, his projected release date was April 15,
2020, reflecting a projected 1, 246 days of good-conduct
time. Id. ¶ 4; id. at Ex. B [ECF No.
22-2]. On July 5, 2019, the BOP updated his sentence
computation pursuant to the First Step Act. Id.
¶ 5, id. at Ex. A at 6. In that recalculation,
the BOP projected that Granados would earn 54 days of
good-conduct time for each year of his 28-year sentence.
Id. ¶ 6. That calculation yields a subtotal of
1, 512 days of good-conduct time, but Granados lost a total
of 81 days of good-conduct time due to discipline, so the BOP
projected him to earn only 1, 431 days of good-conduct time.
Id. ¶¶ 5-6; id. at Ex. A at 7.
Therefore, Granados's new projected release date is
October 13, 2019. Id. ¶ 5; id. at Ex.
A at 7. Granados has submitted no evidence suggesting that
this calculation, or the information on which it is based, is
incorrect. The Court therefore concludes that no genuine
issue of material fact exists as to whether the BOP has
correctly recalculated Granados's projected release date
under the relevant law, and Respondent is entitled to summary
based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the
above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Court DECLINES TO ADOPT the June 26,
2019 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Wright
[ECF No. 12] due to an intervening change in the factual
circumstances surrounding this case;
2. The Court construes Respondent's response to
Petitioner's Objections [ECF No. 21] as a motion for
summary judgment, and that motion is
3. The Petition [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED.
JUDGMENT BE ...