United States District Court, D. Idaho
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Lynn Winmill Chief U.S. District Court Judge
the Court are two letters from Defendant Kristopher Converse
asking the Court to clarify that his federal sentence should
run concurrently with a state sentence. See Dkts.
167, 168. The Court does not have authority to either modify
its judgment or to grant or compute sentence credits and will
therefore deny the request.
Converse is a federal inmate at FCI Florence, Colorado. He
pleaded guilty to a drug conspiracy charge, and in February
2011 this Court sentenced him to 90 months'
incarceration. See Plea Agreement, Dkt. 48; Plea
Hearing Minutes, Dkt. 57; Judgment, Dkt. 84.
time of sentencing, Converse was facing probation violations
- based on conduct related to the offense in this case - in
two Idaho state court cases. In one of these cases, the state
court had previously sentenced Converse to two to five years
in prison, and in the other, Converse had received a
three-to-seven-year sentence. See Feb. 7, 2011
Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”)
¶¶ 52, 54. Both state sentences were imposed in
2007, and both state prison terms were suspended following
periods of retained jurisdiction. See id.
was arrested in November 2009. He had not been federally
indicted at that time, but an arrest warrant for a probation
violation had issued in one of the state court cases
mentioned above. See Id. ¶ 52. Converse was
apparently held in Bannock County Jail beginning in November
2009, and the Court is presuming he remained there until
February 2011, when this Court imposed sentence. See
Id. at 1.
March 2011, roughly two weeks after this Court imposed
sentence, the state court sentenced Mr. Converse on the
probation violations. In both cases, the previously suspended
prison sentences (two to five years and three to seven years)
were imposed. Converse says he thought his federal and state
sentences were intended to be served concurrently. This
Court, however, did not order Converse's federal sentence
to be served concurrently with any anticipated state
sentences. Further, other than Converse's assertion that
he thought his federal and state court sentences would run
concurrently, there is no evidence before the Court
indicating that the state court intended the sentences to run
concurrently with the federal sentence.
event, according to the Bureau of Prisons' (BOP)
calculations, Converse's federal sentence began on April
11, 2012. BOP calculated that Converse would complete his
federal custody term on November 30, 2017, but Converse was
charged with escape, and on February 30, 2018, this Court
sentenced Converse to 12 months plus one day in a separate
case. See United States v. Converse, No.
4:17-cr-285- BLW (D. Idaho). Thus, as of this writing,
Converse remains incarcerated.
raises two issues. First, he believes his federal sentence
should have been served concurrently with the sentences
imposed by the state court in March 2011. Second, he argues
that, at a minimum, he should get credit for a portion of the
time he served in Bannock County Jail, i.e., after
he was federally indicted and before the state court or
federal court imposed sentence.
for prior custody is addressed in 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b),
(b) Credit for prior custody. - A defendant
shall be given credit toward the service of a term of
imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention
prior to ...