Roth v. Young

Full title: John Paul ROTH, Petitioner-Appellant v. Joe P. YOUNG, Respondent-Appellee

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Mar 18, 2008

270 F. App'x 322 (5th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-30618 Summary Calendar.

March 18, 2008.

John Paul Roth, Beaumont, TX, pro se.

Karen J. King, U.S. Attorney's Office, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, USDC No. 2:06-CV-688.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:[fn*] [fn*] 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

John Paul Roth, federal prisoner # 76094-079, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition. Roth is currently serving a 264-month prison sentence imposed by the Southern District of Texas for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana and conspiracy to launder monetary instruments. The sentence was to run concurrently with a previously imposed Texas state sentence of 20 years in prison for possession of a controlled substance and possession of marijuana. Roth argues that the district court erred in not properly applying U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(b) to adjust his sentence and that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has not properly credited him with time served.

Whether the district court should have reduced his sentence pursuant to § 5G1.3(b) is an issue that challenges the correctness of Roth's sentence; therefore, Roth is not entitled to proceed under § 2241. See Jeffers v. Chandler; 253 F.3d 827, 830 (5th Cir. 2001). Roth is not entitled to relief on the remaining issues because he has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies through the BOP as required. See Rourke v. Thompson, 11 F.3d 47, 49 (5th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED.