United States v. Johnson ( 2022 )

Case: 21-60616 Document: 00516384021 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/06/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
July 6, 2022
No. 21-60616
Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Claude Christopher Johnson,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 2:10-CR-6-1
Before Jones, Duncan, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Claude Christopher Johnson, federal prisoner # 05056-043, pleaded
guilty to theft of firearms from a licensed firearm dealer and was sentenced
in 2010 to 120 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release,
and a $3,000 fine. After denying Johnson’s successive motion to amend the
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-60616 Document: 00516384021 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/06/2022
No. 21-60616
judgment, the district court denied Johnson’s motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal.
By moving to proceed IFP in this court, Johnson challenges the district
court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v.
Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Our inquiry “is limited to whether
the appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not
frivolous).” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted). Johnson also seeks expedited
consideration of this appeal. The Government has filed a motion to dismiss
the appeal or, in the alternative, summary affirmance.
In his successive motion to amend the judgment, Johnson sought
credit against his federal sentence for the time he spent in state custody. The
proper vehicle for Johnson to obtain that credit is a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition.
See Leal v. Tombone, 341 F.3d 427, 427-30 (5th Cir. 2003); United States v.
Garcia-Gutierrez, 835 F.2d 585, 586 (5th Cir. 1988). Because Johnson’s
motion was not filed in the district of his incarceration, the district court
could not have considered his motion under § 2241. See United States v.
Brown, 753 F.2d 455, 456 (5th Cir. 1985); see also Reyes-Requena v. United
States, 243 F.3d 893, 895 n.3 (5th Cir. 2001) (noting that a § 2241 petition
must be filed in the district of the prisoner’s incarceration). Moreover, in
2019, Johnson’s § 2241 petition seeking sentence credit on this same ground
was denied by the district court in the Western District of Louisiana, which
was Johnson’s district of incarceration at the time, and Johnson did not
appeal from that denial. See Johnson v. Myers, No. 2:19-CV-241 (W.D. La.
Apr. 16, 2019).
As Johnson’s successive motion to amend the judgment had no other
jurisdictional basis for consideration, “he has appealed from the denial of a
meaningless, unauthorized motion.” United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142
2
Case: 21-60616 Document: 00516384021 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/06/2022
No. 21-60616
(5th Cir. 1994). Johnson has therefore failed to identify a nonfrivolous issue
for appeal. See Howard, 707 F.2d at 220.
Johnson’s motions for leave to proceed IFP and to expedite this appeal
are DENIED. The Government’s motion to dismiss the appeal is
DENIED AS UNNECESSARY, and its alternative motion for summary
affirmance is DENIED. The appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5th
Cir. R. 42.2. Johnson has unsuccessfully sought this same sentence credit
on at least two prior occasions. Johnson is WARNED that future frivolous,
repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings will invite the imposition of sanctions,
which may include dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his
ability to file pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s
jurisdiction. See Coghlan v. Starkey, 852 F.2d 806, 817 n.21 (5th Cir. 1988).
3