Miles v. Bowers

── Miles v. Bowers ── Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Date: April 27, 2026 Category: General United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 25-1291 ARTHUR MILES, Petitioner, Appellant, v. WARDEN FREDDIE BOWERS, Respondent, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Richard G. Stearns, U.S. District Judge] [Jennifer C. Boal, U.S. Magistrate Judge] Before Aframe, Lipez, and Howard, Circuit Judges. Becca Steinberg, with whom Brian Wolfman, Regina Wang, and Georgetown University Law Center Appellate Courts Immersion Clinic were on brief, for petitioner-appellant. Michael L. Fitzgerald, Assistant U.S. Attorney, with whom Leah B. Foley, U.S. Attorney, was on brief, for respondent- appellee. April 27, 2026  LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. The First Step Act of 2018 ("FSA") provides qualified federal prisoners the incentive of time credits to shorten their sentences in exchange for participation in programs designed to reduce recidivism. See Pub. L. No. 115-391, §§ 101-102, 132 Stat. 5194 (codified in scattered sections of 18 U.S.C. and 21 U.S.C.). Petitioner-appellant Arthur Miles was sentenced in October 2022 and April 2023 to a total of 300 months' imprisonment for two separate federal convictions. In the petition for habeas relief now before us, see 28 U.S.C. § 2241,1 Miles claims that the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP" or "the Bureau")2 violated the FSA when it refused to award him credit for work he performed while housed at a county jail during the fifteen months between his first sentencing and his transfer to a federal facility. After the BOP moved to dismiss Miles' petition, the magistrate judge to whom the motion was referred concluded that the regulations invoked by the BOP to deny credit to Miles "are contrary to the express language of the FSA." Report and Recommendation at 6, Miles v. Bowers, No. 24-11243, 2025 WL 418744, 1A petition for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 "is the proper vehicle for a prisoner to challenge the manner, location, or execution of his sentence," including challenges to "the calculation of . . . sentencing credits under the FSA." Sharma v. Peters, 756 F. Supp. 3d 1271, 1274 (M.D. Ala. 2024). 2The named respondent is Warden Bowers of FMC Devens, the federal facility where Miles has been housed. We refer to the BOP because it is the entity responsible for implementing the relevant sections of the FSA. See 18 U.S.C. § 3621(h). - 2 - at *3 (D. Mass. Jan. 15,2025). The district court, however, rejected the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the BOP's motion and instead dismissed Miles' petition. See Miles v. Bowers, No. 24-11243, 2025 WL 417333, at *1 (D. Mass. Feb. 6, 2025). For reasons we shall explain, we vacate the dismissal of Miles' habeas petition and remand for further proceedings. I. The FSA sets forth a detailed scheme for awarding and applying credits that certain federal prisoners may earn for participating in "evidence-based recidivism reduction programming" ("EBRR programs"). 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4). An EBRR program is an activity that either "has been shown by empirical evidence to reduce recidivism" or that research suggests will "likely . . . be effective in reducing recidivism," and that "is designed to help prisoners succeed in their communities upon release from prison." Id. § 3635(3)(A)-(B).3 The statute specifies that such programs 3 Under the FSA, "[p]riority for participation in [EBRR programs] shall be given to medium-risk and high-risk prisoners." 18 U.S.C. § 3621(h)(6). The st