Tatu v. Rasbeary , 142 F. App'x 215 ( 2005 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 23, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-11386
Summary Calendar
PULILEKA MARTIN TATU,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
JOE RASBEARY, Warden, Giles W. Dalby
Correctional Facility,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:04-CV-227
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Pulileka Martin Tatu (Tatu), federal prisoner # 26165-177,
appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
habeas corpus application challenging the Bureau of Prisons’
(BOP) method of calculating good time credit under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3624(b).
Tatu argues that 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b) unambiguously requires
that the BOP calculate a prisoner’s good time credit based on the
sentence imposed rather than on the time he has actually served.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 04-11386
-2-
Further, Tatu argues that the BOP’s method of calculating good
time credit is inconsistent with the plain meaning of 18 U.S.C.
§ 3624(b) and its legislative intent.
In Sample v. Morrison, 406 F.3d 310, 312-13 (5th Cir. 2005),
this court rejected a similar challenge to the BOP’s method of
calculating good time credit. This court determined that the
plain language of 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b) supports the BOP’s method
of calculating good time credit. Id. at 313. Alternatively, the
statute is ambiguous and the BOP’s interpretation is entitled to
deference pursuant to Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources
Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). Id.
Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.