Summary
explaining that applicant may pursue claims challenging BOP's computation of his sentence by filing § 2241 petition in district having personal jurisdiction over the warden of the facility in which he was incarcerated
Summary of this case from Smith v. OliverOpinion
No. 08-5039.
Filed On: October 10, 2008.
BEFORE: Sentelle, Chief Judge, and Rogers and Garland, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Upon consideration of appellant's brief and appendix, which the court construes as including a request for a certificate of appealability, it is
ORDERED that the request for a certificate of appealability be denied.See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). Because appellant has not made "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), no certificate of appealability is warranted. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Appellant may not challenge his District of Columbia conviction in federal court unless his remedy under D.C. Code § 23-110(g) is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. See, e.g., Blair-Bey v. Quick, 151 F.3d 1036, 1042-43 (D.C. Cir. 1998). Although it appears appellant has been denied relief in the District of Columbia courts, this lack of success does not mean appellant may now challenge his D.C. conviction in federal court: the § 23-110 remedy is not considered inadequate or ineffective simply because the requested relief has been denied. See Garris v. Lindsay, 794 F.2d 722, 727 (D.C. Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 993 (1986).
To the extent appellant wishes to pursue those claims dismissed by the District of Columbia courts for lack of jurisdiction, see Warren v. United States, No. 06-CO-204, slip op. at 2-3 (D.C. May 14, 2004) (dismissing for lack of jurisdiction appellant's challenge to the United States Parole Commission's denial of his parole requests and the Bureau of Prison's computation of his sentence), he may be able to do so by filing a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district having personal jurisdiction over the warden of the facility in which appellant is incarcerated — the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. See Stokes v. United States Parole Comm'n, 374 F.3d 1235, 1239 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (section 2241 habeas petition must be filed in judicial district where petitioner's immediate custodian is located).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. Because no certificate of appealability has been allowed, no mandate will issue.