Background
Federal prisoner Afeez Abiola Alao filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, contending that he had earned time credits under 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(A). He alleged that Bureau of Prisons officials improperly refused to apply those credits to reduce his sentence under § 3632(d)(4)(E)(i).
The Bureau of Prisons treated Alao as subject to a final order of removal. After the Northern District of Texas denied his petition, Alao sought to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit concluded that Alao had not presented a nonfrivolous appellate issue. It rejected his assertion that the administrative removal order issued in his case could not be final upon issuance, explaining that an administrative order of removal may become final when issued.
Because Alao made no showing that his Expedited Order of Removal was not final, the court denied his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the appeal as frivolous. It also denied his motion for expedited consideration and immediate release.
Key Takeaways
- An administrative removal order may be final upon issuance.
- A prisoner challenging the Bureau of Prisons’ refusal to apply earned time credits must offer a basis for disputing the finality of the applicable removal order.
- Failure to raise a nonfrivolous issue can result in denial of in forma pauperis status and dismissal of the appeal as frivolous.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the significance of a final removal order when a federal prisoner seeks application of earned time credits. A prisoner cannot obtain appellate review merely by asserting that an expedited administrative removal order is not final; the prisoner must make a factual or legal showing supporting that position.
The unpublished ruling also illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s use of frivolous-appeal procedures to dispose of § 2241 appeals that lack a nonfrivolous basis.