Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
D.C. No. CV-99-11383-MLR
Editorial Note:This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding.
Before WALLACE, SCHROEDER, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Federal prisoner Claudio R. Martinez appeals pro se the district court's amendment of his term of supervised release, following his petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, which claimed that his 10-year supervised release term exceeded the statutory maximum. On November 29, 1999, the district court entered an order amending its judgment to "provide for five (5) years supervised release because of clerical error." We conclude that the district court was without jurisdiction to consider the petition and we vacate the district court's order and remand for further proceedings.
Martinez' 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition must be heard in the custodial court, and not the sentencing court, even if the § 2241 petition contests the legality of a sentence by falling under the "savings clause" of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Hernandez v. Campbell, 204 F.3d 861, 865 (9th Cir.2000). Therefore, the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Martinez' claim as a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Martinez may not bring a section 2241 petition in an attempt to circumvent § 2244(b), see Moore v. Reno, 185 F.3d 1054, 1054 (9th Cir.1999) (holding that the dismissal of a subsequent § 2255 motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) does not render federal habeas relief ineffective or inadequate remedy).
VACATED and REMANDED for further proceedings.