Harris v. Quintana, 060216 FED5, 16-20130

Docket Nº:16-20130
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM:
Party Name:SHANNON KEITH HARRIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN FRANCISCO QUINTANA, Respondent-Appellee.
Judge Panel:Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:June 02, 2016
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

SHANNON KEITH HARRIS, Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

WARDEN FRANCISCO QUINTANA, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 16-20130

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

June 2, 2016

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15-CV-3416

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:[*]

Shannon Harris, federal prisoner # 16186-179, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he claimed that he is actually innocent of his sentencing enhancement and that 28 U.S.C. § 2255's savings clause permitted him to bring this claim in a § 2241 petition. Harris is not required to obtain a certificate of appealability. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 425 (5th Cir. 2005).

When Harris filed his claim for relief in the Southern District of Texas, he was incarcerated in Kentucky. The district court thus lacked jurisdiction to consider the § 2241 petition because Harris was required to bring it in the district where he was confined. See Padilla, 416 F.3d at 426; Lee v. Wetzel, 244 F.3d 370, 373 (5th Cir. 2001).

Accordingly, the judgment of...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP