Moose v. LNU ( 2022 )

Case: 22-50002 Document: 00516486508 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/27/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 22-50002 September 27, 2022
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Thirplus Timo Moose,
Petitioner—Appellant,
versus
FNU LNU, Warden of Bastrop and/or Title Holder,
Respondent—Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:21-CV-891
Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Thirplus Timo Moose, federal prisoner # 21011-045, was convicted of
conspiracy to commit bank robbery, armed bank robbery with forcible
restraint, and use or discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence causing
murder. He now appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-50002 Document: 00516486508 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/27/2022
No. 22-50002
he asserted he should be released immediately on the basis of a purported
novation agreement he sent the Government, which, among other things,
deemed his term of imprisonment satisfied. According to Moose, the
Government assented to the novation by failing to reject it. Additionally,
Moose seeks leave to file a supplemental brief.
“In an appeal from the denial of habeas relief, this court reviews a
district court’s findings of fact for clear error and issues of law de novo.”
Jeffers v. Chandler, 253 F.3d 827, 830 (5th Cir. 2001). This court “may affirm
the district court’s denial of relief on any ground supported by the record.”
Hunter v. Tamez, 622 F.3d 427, 430 (5th Cir. 2010). Here, Moose attempts
to unilaterally change the terms of his plea agreement and sentence to obtain
immediate release and asserts that the Government has agreed to this
novation by its silence. This contention is without merit.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Moose’s motion
for leave to file a supplemental brief in support is DENIED.
2