UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

SEVERIANO GONZALES DELGADO CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS NO. 22-3104

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECTION I SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT

ORDER & REASONS

Before the Court is a petition1 by Severiano Gonzales Delgado (“Delgado”) seeking relief from a federal conviction in the Northern District of Alabama.2 The petition states that Delgado is currently “serving a state sentence, with a future federal sentence to serve.”3 The petition indicates that Delgado is currently incarcerated in a state facility in Alabama.4 It is not clear whether Delgado is seeking relief pursuant to

,

, or both.5 This Court lacks jurisdiction to provide relief pursuant to either statute, and will therefore dismiss Delgado’s petition. Section 2241 authorizes district courts to grant habeas corpus relief “within

1 R. Doc. No. 6. 2

(listing a case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama as “the decision or action [Delgado is] challenging”) 3

. 4

(listing “Limestone Corrections, Alabama Department of Corrections” under “place of confinement”) 5 The form petition is labeled “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under

,” and Delgado has also filled out the section labeled “Motion Under

.” He further states that he wants the Court to “vacate [his] firearm convictions and order [him] deported from the United States.”

. their respective jurisdictions.” 28 U.S.C. 2241(a). “[T]he district of incarceration is the only district that has jurisdiction to entertain a defendant’s § 2241 petition.” Lee v. Weitzel,

(5th Cir. 2001). Because Delgado is not incarcerated within the Eastern District of Louisiana, this Court lacks jurisdiction over his § 2241 petition. Section 2255 allows an incarcerated person to challenge the validity of their sentence by “mov[ing] the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence.”

(a). “A section 2255 motion must be filed in the sentencing court.” Pack v. Yusuff,

(5th Cir. 2000); accord Ojo v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.,

(5th Cir. 1997) ([T]he only court with jurisdiction to hear [petitioner’s § 2255 claims] is the court that sentenced him[.]”). This Court did not impose either of Delgado’s sentences. This Court therefore lacks jurisdiction over his § 2255 petition. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. New Orleans, Louisiana, October 11, 2022.

An__

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE