Gerardo Alvarado v. Eric Holder ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 09-11084     Document: 00511219197          Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/30/2010
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    August 30, 2010
    No. 09-11084
    Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    GERARDO BAZALDUA ALVARADO,
    Petitioner-Appellant
    v.
    ERIC HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL,
    Respondent-Appellee
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 3:09-CV-1707
    Before D EMOSS, STEWART, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Gerardo Bazaldua Alvarado, Texas prisoner # 1267940, appeals in forma
    pauperis the dismissal of his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2241
     petition, challenging his 1998
    order of removal. Alvarado contends that his 1998 order of removal is invalid in
    light of United States v. Chapa-Garza, 
    243 F.3d 921
     (5th Cir 2001), and,
    therefore, should be vacated.          Alvarado also contends that this court has
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
    Case: 09-11084     Document: 00511219197 Page: 2          Date Filed: 08/30/2010
    No. 09-11084
    jurisdiction over his § 2241 petition and “that he is being detained unlawfully
    by” Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).1
    This court reviews de novo the district court’s legal conclusions on
    jurisdiction. Zolicoffer v. United States Department of Justice, 
    315 F.3d 538
    , 540
    (5th Cir. 2003). “For a court to have habeas jurisdiction under section 2241, the
    prisoner must be ‘in custody’ at the time he files his petition for the conviction
    or sentence he wishes to challenge.” 
    Id.
    The issuance of a detainer does not place Alvarado “in custody” for
    purposes of § 2241. Id. at 540-41. As Alvarado was not in custody, the district
    court did not have jurisdiction under § 2241 to challenge the detainer.
    Furthermore, “the REAL ID Act has divested federal courts of jurisdiction over
    § 2241 petitions attacking removal orders.” Rosales v. BICE, 
    426 F.3d 733
    , 736
    (5th Cir. 2005).    When and if a final order of removal is entered against
    Alvarado, his sole means of obtaining judicial review of that order would be to
    file a petition for review in the appropriate court of appeals. See 
    id.
    AFFIRMED.
    1
    The enforcement functions of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
    within the Department of Justice were transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement
    (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security in March 2003. 
    6 U.S.C. § 251
    .
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-11084

Judges: Demoss, Stewart, Elrod

Filed Date: 8/30/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024