Opinion
CASE NO. 1:19 CV 116
02-19-2019
ADELBERTO MARRERO, Petitioner, v. WARDEN MARK K. WILLIAMS, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se petitioner Adelberto Marrero filed this action seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. His petition challenges his sentence enhancement as a career criminal under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. (Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 13.)
Federal district courts conduct initial review of habeas corpus petitions, and must dismiss a petition if it "plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court." Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254 (applicable to § 2241 habeas corpus petitions pursuant to Rule 1(b)); see also Allen v. Perini, 424 F.2d 134, 141 (6 Cir. 1970) ("the District Court has a duty to screen out a habeas corpus petition which should be dismissed for lack of merit on its face").
The petition must be summarily dismissed. First, claims asserted by federal prisoners seeking to challenge their sentences must be filed in the sentencing court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Charles v. Chandler, 180 F.3d 753, 756 (6th Cir. 1999). Petitioner's challenge to his sentence is not cognizable under § 2241, as it does not fall within the "narrow subset" of cases where the Sixth Circuit has indicated a § 2241 petition is allowed. See Hill v. Masters, 836 F.3d 591, 599-600 (6 Cir. 2016). Second, this Court has considered, and rejected, Petitioner's contention that his sentence is unconstitutional in connection with motions he filed in his criminal case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and 18 U.S.C. § 3582. See United States v. Adelberto Marrero, Case No. 1: 05 CR 00128, Doc. Nos. 313, 319. Petitioner's challenge to his sentence as a career criminal under the Sentencing Guidelines lacks merit for the reasons stated in the Court's rulings in his criminal case.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the Petition in this case is denied and this action is dismissed in accordance with Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases. The Court further certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Dan Aaron Polster 2/19/2019
DAN AARON POLSTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE