§ 4165, that: "If during the term of imprisonment a prisoner commits any offense or violates the rules of the institution, all or any part of his earned good time may be forfeited."
"The matter of granting or withholding or cancelling good time of a Federal prisoner is a matter for the determination of the prison authorities, subject to the supervision of the Attorney General of the United States, and the decision of the prison authorities or the Attorney General is conclusive in the absence of a showing of abuse of discretion, that is, that the decision was arbitrary or capricious. * * *" Smoake v. Willingham, 359 F.2d 386, 388 (10th Cir. 1966).
Petitioner has refused to comply with the prison officials by refusing to go into A/O status and into any treatment program. This Court will not interfere with the treatment and discipline of a prisoner while incarcerated in a federal penitentiary since such interference would be a taking of the authority of the Attorney General. 18 U.S.C. § 4001. There are no unusual or exceptional circumstances present in this case as to warrant interference with such administration. See Haynes v. Harris, 344 F.2d 463, 465 (8th Cir. 1965); United States v. Marchese, 341 F.2d 782, 789 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 817, 86 S. Ct. 41, 15 L. Ed. 2d 64 (1965). It is obvious that petitioner's allegations are completely frivolous, in that the prison authorities do have the power to withhold good time, and this Court has no intention of serving as the outlet for the mere dissatisfaction of prisoners with their current status.
Finally, there is no allegation that petitioner has exhausted his administrative procedures or remedies under 18 U.S.C. § 4166 by applying for relief to the Director of the Bureau of Prisons. Smoake v. Willingham, supra, 359 F.2d at 387-388; McCormick v. Heritage, 216 F. Supp. 222 (N.D.Ga.1962).
Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be denied and the petition for writ of habeas corpus will be dismissed.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.