FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT December 3, 2019 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court HARTMUT GRAEWE, Petitioner - Appellant, No. 19-3081 v. (D.C. No. 5:18-CV-03306-JWL) (D. Kansas) NICOLE ENGLISH, Warden, USP-Leavenworth, Respondent - Appellee. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before BRISCOE, McHUGH, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Mr. Hartmut Graewe, a federal prisoner acting pro se,1 seeks habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Exercising our jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 1 Because Mr. Graewe proceeds pro se, we liberally construe his filings. See Eldridge v. Berkebile, 791 F.3d 1239, 1243 n.4 (10th Cir. 2015). But we will not act as his advocate. See id. I. BACKGROUND In 1983, a jury in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio found Mr. Graewe guilty of various drug-related and RICO charges, including operating a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848. The district court sentenced him to life imprisonment on the § 848 count and to terms of years on thirty-seven other counts. In 1985, Mr. Graewe was transferred to the U.S. Penitentiary in Marion, Illinois, where he claims he first learned his life sentence for violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848 (1976) was not eligible for parole.2 The Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) later transferred Mr. Graewe to the federal penitentiary in Bruceton Mills, West Virginia. Graewe v. O’Brien, No. 1:12cv103, 2012 WL 7210539, at *1 (N.D. W. Va. Nov. 8, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, No. 1:12CV103, 2013 WL 676273, at *1 (N.D. W. Va. Feb. 25, 2013), aff’d, 538 F. App’x 324 (4th Cir. 2013) (unpublished). In 2012, Mr. Graewe filed a § 2241 petition in the District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, alleging that the BOP improperly determined he was not eligible for parole. Graewe, 2013 WL 676273, at *1; see also Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 447 (2004) (“Whenever a § 2241 habeas petitioner seeks to challenge his present physical custody within the United States, he should name his warden as respondent and file the petition in the district of confinement.”). The 2 In 1984, Congress passed the Sentencing Reform Act, which eliminated parole in the federal system for offenses committed after November 1, 1987. Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98–473, § 218(a)(5), 98 Stat. 1987, 2027. 2 magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) concluded that Mr. Graewe was not ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals