UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,	No. 05-3136
v.	(D.C. No. 95-CR-10079-JTM)
ANTHONY S. SMITH,	(D. Kan.)
Defendant - Appellant.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before EBEL, McKAY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.

After examining Defendant's brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Defendant appeals the district court's denial of his Rule 36 motion to correct his sentence. The district court held that it was without jurisdiction to consider the motion. Rec., Vol. I, Tab 26, at 2 (Dist. Ct. Order). Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure gives courts discretion to "correct a clerical error in a judgment, order, or other part of the record . . . ." Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. However, Defendant's claim of clerical error is somewhat misleading because the gravamen of his complaint asserts that he is not receiving credit for one day he served while in federal custody; Defendant seeks "credit for time detained in federal custody from 2-22-96 to 6-13-97, and not from 2-23-96." Aplt. Br. At 2.

Defendant effectively requested that the district court compute the amount of time he served in federal custody.1 The federal judiciary is without jurisdiction to correct such complaints. Credit for time served "must be made by the Attorney General, through the Bureau of Prisons, after sentencing." See United States v. Jenkins, 38 F.3d 1143, 1144 (10th Cir. 1994) (citation omitted); see also United States v. Brann, 990 F.2d 98, 104 (3d Cir. 1993) (explaining that "district courts do not have jurisdiction to grant credit for prior custody").2 The district court did not abuse its discretion in so holding.3

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge