Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cramer v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION


July 15, 2009

CHRISTOPHER E. CRAMER, PETITIONER,
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Philip S. Gutierrez United States District Judge

ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING PETITION

On June 30, 2009, petitioner, a federal inmate currently incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in McCreary, Kentucky, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 ("Petition").

CONTENTION

Petitioner contends that while incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Victorville, California, prison authorities lost some of petitioner's property. Petitioner filed a claim seeking $1,300 for reimbursement. Petitioner alleges that he received no response to his claim. Petitioner does not specify what relief he expects this Court to award him.

DISCUSSION

The Court is obligated to address the issue of jurisdiction before it can reach the merits of petitioner's claim. See Hernandez v. Campbell, 204 F.3d 861, 865-66 (9th Cir. 2000). Challenges to the legality of a conviction or a sentence generally must be made in a motion to vacate sentence filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the sentencing court. Challenges to the manner, location, or conditions of a sentence's execution must be filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the custodial court. See Hernandez, 204 F.3d at 864; Doganiere v. United States, 914 F.2d 165, 169-70 (9th Cir. 1990). Finally, challenges to conditions of confinement must be brought through a civil rights action. See Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991). Here, petitioner appears to seek unspecified relief from the "Supervisory Attorney of Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles" for not responding to petitioner's "Tort Claim." Such a claim does not implicate the execution of petitioner's sentence and, therefore, is not within the purview of a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition.*fn1

CONCLUSION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that judgment be entered denying the Petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

FREDERICK F. MUMM United States Magistrate Judge


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.