Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

153 F. App'x 874

James v. Nash

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided November 9, 2005

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2005-11-09

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3624

Relies on O'Donald v. Johns

Decided 2005-11-09

¶1OPINION

PER CURIAM

¶2Elmer James, Jr. appeals from an order of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, denying his petition for habeas corpus. In his petition, James argued that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) was miscalculating his “good time credits” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b). James argued that the BOP incorrectly based its calculations on the number of days actually served rather than the length of the sentence imposed.

¶3We recently addressed the identical arguments in O’Donald v. Johns, 402 F.3d 172 (3d Cir.2005). We concluded, as did the District Court here, that the BOP’s interpretation of the statute, which utilizes a formula based on the time actually served, is reasonable. We therefore will affirm the District Court’s order.

/153/fappx/874 · .json · Public domain