United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER JUDGMENT AND CLOSE CASE
STANTEY A. BOONE, District Judge.
Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
Petitioner is in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") at the Federal Correctional Institution located in Mendota, California, serving a sentence of 240 months pursuant to a 2004 conviction for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Resp't's Answer, Ex. 1, De Vore Decl., (hereinafter "De Vore Decl.") at ¶ 3. Petitioner currently has a projected release date of January 31, 2022, via good conduct time. De Vore Decl. at Attach. 1.
On November 18, 2013, Petitioner filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court. He does not challenge his conviction, but a disciplinary proceeding held on September 13, 2012, in which he was found guilty of violating Prohibited Act Codes 296 ("Use Of Mail For Abuses Other Than Criminal Activity (Furthering A High Severity Act Of Misconduct)"), and 299 ("Conduct Which Disrupts The Orderly Running Of The Institution MOST LIKE Code 240A, Attempted Extortion"). Id. at Attach. 5(c). Petitioner claims his due process rights were violated because (1) he was not provided at least twenty-four hours advance written notice of the charges; and (2) he did not receive an impartial disciplinary hearing.
On March 6, 2014, Respondent filed an answer to the petition. Respondent contends the petition lacks merit and should be denied. On March 17, 2014, Petitioner filed a traverse.
Writ of habeas corpus relief extends to a person in custody under the authority of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241. While a federal prisoner who wishes to challenge the validity or constitutionality of his conviction must bring a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a petitioner challenging the manner, location, or conditions of that sentence's execution must bring a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See, e.g., Brown v. United States , 610 F.2d 672, 677 (9th Cir. 1990); Capaldi v. Pontesso , 135 F.3d 1122, 1123 (6th Cir. 1998); Kingsley v. Bureau of Prisons , 937 F.2d 26, 30 n.5 (2nd Cir. 1991); United States v. Jalili , 925 F.2d 889, 893-94 (6th Cir. 1991). To receive relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 a petitioner in federal custody must show that his sentence is being executed in an illegal, but not necessarily unconstitutional, manner. See, e.g., Clark v. Floyd , 80 F.3d 371, 372, 374 (9th Cir. 1995) (contending time spent in state custody should be credited toward federal custody); Jalili , 925 F.2d at 893-94 (asserting petitioner should be housed at a community treatment center); Barden, 921 F.2d at 479 (arguing Bureau of Prisons erred in determining whether petitioner could receive credit for time spent in state custody); Brown , 610 F.2d at 677 (challenging content of inaccurate pre-sentence report used to deny parole).
In this case, Petitioner challenges the execution of his sentence. Therefore, the Court has jurisdiction to consider the petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
A petitioner filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 must file the petition in the judicial district of the petitioner's custodian. Brown , 610 F.2d at 677. Petitioner is in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons at the Federal Correctional Institution in Mendota, California, which is located within the ...