Immigrant unable to apply credits to shorten sentence

Appeals court rules removal order prevents use of FSA credits

A federal appeals court has ruled that an immigrant from Mexico, who has been under a removal order since 2005, is not eligible for credits under the First Step Act that would enable him to serve a reduced prison sentence.

A panel of judges serving on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that 45-year-old Rando Saavedra-Ramirez "is ineligible to apply FSA time credits to his sentence if he is the subject of a final order of removal under any provision of the immigration laws."

Judges Paul Matey, Timika Montgomery-Reeves and Richard L. Nygaard stated that an order of removal from the United States was issued against Saavedra-Ramirez in 2005.

"That order was made by an immigration officer and approved by a supervisor, and it was not subject to administrative appeal," the panel concluded.

"We have carefully considered the various arguments raised in Saavedra-Ramirez's appellate brief, and none of them warrants disturbing the (Western District's) denial of habeas relief," the Third Circuit judges concluded.

The First Step Act refers to federal programs that give inmates the opportunity to reduce their time behind bars.

The act was passed as a way to reduce recidivism by providing drug treatment, addressing mental health problems and providing vocational and educational opportunities and life skills training to inmates.

Saavedra-Ramirez filed his petition to apply FSA credits he has earned while serving a prison sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution at Loretto as a way to shorten his time behind bars.

He is serving a term of 210 months on a charge of possession with the intent to distribute more than 50 grams of methamphetamine.

His federal sentence was imposed by a judge presiding in the Southern District of Texas.

He filed his original complaint seeking the application of his earned time credits at Loretto with the District Court in Johnstown.

Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto recommended his claim be rejected.

Pesto, who retired recently, summed up Saavedra-Ramirez's situation by stating, "Petitioner asserts that the Bureau of Prisons is illegally refusing to apply (earned time credits) to his sentence for programming completed under the First Step Act, because, according to petitioner, he is not subject to a final order of removal."

But, Pesto ruled that Saavedra-Ramirez is under a final order of removal, stating he was admitted to the country after falsely stating he was a citizen of the United States.

Saavedra-Ramirez has since applied for asylum due to fear of persecution.

"To put that plainly, Saavedra-Ramirez's very pursuit of asylum ... concedes the existence of a final order of removal," Pesto concluded as he urged rejection of the inmate's request for FSA credits.

U.S. District Judge Nora Barry Fischer upheld Pesto's recommendation.

The Third Circuit panel, in its opinion, affirmed the ruling.

"As we noted earlier, an expedited order of removal was issued against Saavedra-Ramirez in 2005. ... Accordingly, that order is final and thus we agree with the Government and (the Western District Court) Saavedra-Ramirez is ineligible to have FSA credits applied to his sentence.

"Furthermore, contrary to Saavedra-Ramirez's contention, the district judge (Fischer) did not abuse her discretion by presiding over this case."

That last statement referred to Saavedra-Ramirez's contention that the judge has a son who is a prosecutor in the Western District.

The panel emphasized that the judge's son was not involved in the case, either as a supervisor or case attorney.

Saavedra-Ramirez has recently been transferred from Loretto to a federal prison in Lexington, Ky.