Patterson v. Johnson ( 1999 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 98-41035
    USDC No. 4:97-CV-354
    CECIL RAY PATTERSON,
    Petitioner-Appellant,
    versus
    GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS
    DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
    INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
    Respondent-Appellee.
    - - - - - - - - - -
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Texas
    - - - - - - - - - -
    June 14, 1999
    Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Cecil Ray Patterson, Texas state prisoner #779579, has moved
    this court for a certificate of appealability (COA) to challenge
    his transfer from federal to state custody.     Because Patterson’s
    
    22 U.S.C. § 2241
     petition challenges the execution of his federal
    sentence, a COA is not required.   See     
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    ; Ojo v.
    INS, 
    106 F.3d 680
    , 681 (5th Cir. 1997).     His request for COA is
    therefore DENIED as unnecessary.
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
    No. 98-41035
    - 2 -
    No further briefing is necessary to decide this appeal.         See
    Dickinson v. Wainwright, 
    626 F.2d 1184
    , 1186 (5th Cir. 1980).
    Section 2241 is the proper habeas remedy if a prisoner challenges
    the execution of his sentence rather than the validity of his
    conviction and sentence.   United States v. Cleto, 
    956 F.2d 83
    , 84
    (5th Cir. 1992).   Patterson, however, cannot obtain the relief he
    seeks via his § 2241 petition.   “[H]abeas is not available to
    review questions unrelated to the cause of detention.     Its sole
    function is to grant relief from unlawful imprisonment or custody
    and it cannot be used properly for any other purpose.”      Pierre v.
    United States, 
    525 F.2d 933
    , 935-36 (5th Cir. 1976).      Although
    Patterson is currently in state custody, he makes no argument
    attacking the lawfulness of that confinement, nor does he
    challenge the validity of his federal sentence.   Thus,
    Patterson’s claim is not cognizable in this federal habeas
    proceeding.
    COA DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 98-41035

Filed Date: 6/17/1999

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014