United States District Court, D. Maryland
MICHAEL S. FEATHER-GORBEY Petitioner
WARDEN, FCI-CUMBERLAND Respondent
RICHARD D. BENNETT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §2241, Petitioner Michael Gorbey alleges that the
Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has improperly denied him
access to the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA)
process for a detainer filed against him by the State of
Virginia for an alleged violation of probation. ECF 1. In
response, Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss or for Summary
Judgment (ECF 5), which is opposed by Gorbey (ECF 7).
Respondent filed a Reply. ECF 8. There is no need for a
hearing to determine the issues pending before the Court.
See Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons stated herein,
the petition shall be dismissed and Respondent's motion,
construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment, shall be granted.
who is serving a term of 252 months in the BOP, asserts that
he has an active detainer lodged against him by the State of
Virginia, for an “alleged felony probation violation in
Fauquier County, Virginia.” ECF 1 at p.
He claims that under Virginia law, this is a new felony
entitling him to a fast and speedy trial. Id. He
asserts that despite that fact, the BOP is “openly
denying me access to the IADA process resulting in
further explains that the detainer was lodged on April 25,
2017, by the State of Virginia's “use of an illegal
or otherwise unconstitutional 2010 Capias . . . issued some 1
month outside the 7 year statute of limitations.” ECF 1
at p. 10. He states there was a 2003 Capias which expired and
the 2010 Capias was “issued by the Court clerk without
being order[ed] to do so by the Court in violation of double
jeopardy and or collateral estoppel.” Id. He
characterizes this action as a “malicious abuse of
October 18, 2017, Gorbey states, the Fauquier Circuit Court
ordered another Capias issued, which he claims is 7 years, 4
months beyond the expiration of the 2003 Capias. Id.
claims that because the detainer and capias were active at
his original sentencing by the District of Columbia court in
2008 and at his remand sentencing in 2014, his
“sentence categories” were increased by one
level, “extending the length of my present
sentence.” Id. at p. 11. Gorbey expects to be
resentenced again because of other alleged sentencing errors
by the D.C. Superior Court and the detainer again presents a
problem with raising his sentencing guidelines, but the BOP
will not allow him access to the IADA process to have the
open charges addressed. Id. Further, Gorbey asserts
that the detainer prohibits him from progressing to a lower
security prison, or to participate in programming such as
entry to a halfway house. Id.
relief, Gorbey seeks an Order from this Court directing the
BOP to “promptly file IADA fast and speedy trial
demands to Fauquier Circuit Court” and unspecified
compensatory damages. Id. at p. 12.
asserts that the petition should be dismissed because an
alleged violation of the IADA does not state a sufficient
ground for habeas relief and, in any event, the BOP properly
concluded that Gorbey's detainer is not one to which the
IADA process applies. ECF 5-1.
Summary Judgment is governed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a) which
The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows
that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and
the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Supreme Court has clarified that this does not mean that any
factual dispute will defeat the motion:
By its very terms, this standard provides that the mere
existence of some alleged factual dispute between
the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly supported
motion for summary judgment; the requirement is ...