North v. Yusuff
North v. Yusuff
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-60380 Conference Calendar
SIDNEY S. NORTH,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
KHURSHID YUSUFF, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 5:99-CV-40-BrS -------------------- April 10, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Sidney North, federal prisoner # 15451-083, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his habeas petition for want of
jurisdiction. The district court construed North’s
28 U.S.C. § 2241petition as a
28 U.S.C. § 2255motion. North argues that
he was erroneously sentenced under the Sentencing Reform Act of
1984 for his offenses which occurred in 1987, that he is entitled
to parole and good-time credit under pre-Sentencing Guidelines
law, and that he is challenging the manner in which his sentence
is being executed and not his conviction.
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 00-60380 -2-
We review the district court’s dismissal of North’s
28 U.S.C. § 2241petition de novo. See Venegas v. Henman,
126 F.3d 760, 761(5th Cir. 1997). The district court correctly
determined that North’s petition challenged the validity of his
sentence, not the manner in which it was being carried out, and
the court properly construed North’s complaint as a
28 U.S.C. § 2255motion. Pack v. Yusuff,
218 F.3d 448, 451(5th Cir.
2000); Kinder v. Purdy,
222 F.3d 209, 212(5th Cir. 2000). North
must file his
28 U.S.C. § 2255challenge in the court which
imposed the sentence, and the dismissal of North’s petition for
lack of jurisdiction was not error. See Ojo v. Immigration and
Naturalization Service,
106 F.3d 680, 683(5th Cir. 1997). His
motion to file an out-of-time reply brief is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished