Free Order on Motion to Vacate (2255) - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:00-cr-00526-WDM

Document 432

Filed 02/09/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO JUDGE WALKER D. MILLER

Civil Action No. 07-cv-00283-WDM (Criminal Action No. 00-cr-00526-WDM) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. MAX WILLIAM CHRISP, Movant.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CORRECT SENTENCE

Movant has filed, through counsel, on January 10, 2007, a " Motion to Correct Sentence." For the reasons stated below, the motion will be denied. Movant was sentenced on February 28, 2003. He alleges in the " Motion to Correct Sentence"that he entered the Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP) within the United States Bureau of Prisons (BOP) in April 2006, that he was terminated from RDAP on June 1, 2006, and that his termination from RDAP prevents him from obtaining an early release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e). Despite titling the instant motion as a motion to correct his sentence, Movant does not ask the Court to correct his sentence. Instead, Movant " seeks a hearing to determine if the BOP' decision to s terminate him from the RDAP was properly made." (Mot. to Correct Sentence at ¶3.) Movant asserts statutory authority for the " Motion to Correct Sentence"pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Section 2255 is available to correct sentencing defects that raise constitutional, jurisdictional, or other fundamental issues. See United States v.

Case 1:00-cr-00526-WDM

Document 432

Filed 02/09/2007

Page 2 of 2

Addonizio, 442 U.S. 178, 185 (1979). As noted above, Movant does not allege that his " sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack." 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Therefore, the Court finds that Movant is not entitled to relief pursuant to § 2255 and the " Motion to Correct Sentence"must be denied. Movant' claims challenging the execution of his sentence properly are raised in an s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and not in a motion in his criminal case. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the " Motion to Correct Sentence"filed on January 10, 2007, is denied and this civil action is dismissed. DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 9th day of February, 2007.

BY THE COURT: s/ Walker D. Miller

WALKER D. MILLER United States District Judge

2