Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Matthew Beckstrand v. Thomas Read; Nettie Simmons; Does 1-10

March 29, 2012

MATTHEW BECKSTRAND,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
THOMAS READ; NETTIE SIMMONS; DOES 1-10, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Susan Oki Mollway Chief United States District Judge

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS

I. INTRODUCTION.

Plaintiff Matthew Beckstrand ("Beckstrand") brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants Thomas Read and Nettie Simmons (collectively, "Defendants") for constitutional violations in connection with an alleged miscalculation of his state-court sentence. Beckstrand claims that the miscalculation caused him to spend 73 days in prison for an alleged parole violation after the date his parole term allegedly should have ended.

Defendants now move to dismiss Beckstrand's claims on the ground that Beckstrand failed to file suit within the applicable statute of limitations period. See Defs. Thomas Read and Nettie Simmons' Mot. to Dismiss (the "Motion"), ECF No. 6. The court DENIES the Motion.

II. BACKGROUND.

Beckstrand alleges that on November 6, 2006, he was sentenced by Judge Elizabeth Strance of the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit, State of Hawaii, to a maximum of five years in prison in Criminal Case No. 99-248K, with the Hawaii Paroling Authority ("HPA") having the ability to release him on parole earlier. Compl. ¶ 7, ECF No. 1. At the time the state court sentenced him, Beckstrand was already serving a federal sentence at a federal penitentiary in Oregon in Criminal Case No. 04-00273 SOM. Id. ¶ 10.

Beckstrand alleges that Judge Strance ordered the state sentence to run concurrently with the federal sentence imposed by this court. Id. ¶ 8. Beckstrand claims that the credit he was to receive against his state sentence for time served under the federal sentence was memorialized in the Stipulation Regarding Pre-Sentence Credits and Order. Id. ¶¶ 9, 11. The stipulation is not in the record in this case, and no language from that document has been quoted to this court.

After serving his federal prison sentence, Beckstrand allegedly was transferred to state prison to serve the remainder of his state prison sentence, then released on state parole on March 6, 2008. Id. ¶¶ 13-14.

Upon his release, Beckstrand allegedly met with his state parole officer, J. Godbout, who informed Beckstrand that he "had him until 2012," which Beckstrand took to mean that the maximum state parole term would end in 2012. Id. ¶¶ 15-16.

Beckstrand says that he told Godbout that, because the federal sentence had been credited to his state sentence, his state parole should end by October 30, 2009. Id. ¶¶ 12, 17. Beckstrand claims that he provided Godbout with the stipulation to support his position, but that Godbout said Beckstrand was not entitled to the credit he claimed and that Judge Strance had "broken the law." Id. ¶ 20.

Beckstrand allegedly then contacted the State of Hawaii's Department of Public Safety ("DPS") and spoke with Simmons, a litigation coordinator responsible for measuring sentences and determining state prisoners' release dates. Id.

¶¶ 3, 21. Beckstrand says that he provided Simmons with a copy of the state-court judgment and stipulation, but that Simmons said that DPS would not give him the credit he claimed. Id.

¶¶ 23, 25. Beckstrand says he next spoke with Read, the administrator for DPS's Offender Management Service. Read is allegedly responsible for determining the maximum release dates for state prisoners. Id. ¶¶ 2, 26-27. Read also allegedly informed Beckstrand that Judge Strance "broke the law" and that Beckstrand was not entitled to the credit he claimed. Id. ¶ 28.

Beckstrand alleges that his state parole term should have ended no later than October 30, 2009, and that he complied with all of the terms of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.