Grullon v. United States, Docket Nos. 98 Cr. 524 (RCC), 04 Civ. 5766 (RCC) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2006)
Just a quick note to follow up the discussion below of Hickman v. United States. In Grullon, the defendant argued in a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because (among other things) his attorney "should have argued at his sentencing that he should receive credit for time he served on a related state charge." Judge Casey of the Southern District of New York rejected defendant's argument and, in doing so, noted that his attorney had raised the issue at sentencing and that "the Court expressly declined his application." Thus and notwithstanding the absence of any legal discussion on the point, Judge Casey's findings concerning the entitlement to good time off of a federal sentence for time served on a state conviction are consistent with those of Judge Crotty.