IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-11330
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN RODRIQUEZ,
a/k/a Juan Rodriguez
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 94-CR-24-1
- - - - - - - - - -
October 22, 1998
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Rodriquez, Texas prisoner # 687029, appeals the
district court’s denial of his motion for his “Federal Sentence
to Run Concurrent with Remainder of State Sentence.” Rodriquez
contends that his federal sentence should have commenced when he
was remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal after
sentencing.
Rodriquez was “loaned” to federal authorities pursuant to a
writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum to answer the federal
charges pending against him. He was thereafter returned to Texas
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 97-11330
-2-
authorities. See Causey v. Civiletti, 621 F.2d 691, 693 (5th
Cir. 1980)(if a defendant in state custody is turned over to
federal officials for federal prosecution, the state government’s
loss of jurisdiction is only temporary and the prisoner will be
returned to state custody at the completion of the federal
proceedings).
“A sentence to a term of imprisonment commences on the date
the defendant is received in custody awaiting transportation to .
. . the official detention facility at which the sentence is to
be served.” 18 U.S.C. § 3585. Rodriquez could not be received
by the federal authorities for service of his federal sentence
until he was released by Texas authorities. See Blackshear v.
United States, 434 F.2d 58, 59 (5th Cir. 1970). The district
court’s denial of Rodriquez’s motion is
AFFIRMED.