Summary
affirming district court's dismissal of § 2241 petition as moot, where petition challenged BOP's determination concerning RRC placement and sought immediate transfer to an RRC, and petitioner was placed at an RRC during pendency of the proceeding
Summary of this case from Brown v. PhelpsOpinion
No. 09-56380.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed July 1, 2010.
Kevin Jessie Walker, Lompoc, CA, pro se.
Donna Ford, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:09-cv-01322-GAF.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Federal prisoner Kevin Jessie Walker appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition as moot. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm the district court.
Walker contends that the district court erred by dismissing his habeas petition seeking immediate transition to a Residential Reentry Center (RRC). The record reflects that Walker is currently placed at an RRC and that his projected release date is July 16, 2010. Thus, there is no injury that can be redressed by a favorable decision, and the case is moot. See Burnett v. Lamped, 432 F.3d 996, 999-1001 (9th Cir. 2005); see also Munoz v. Rowland, 104 F.3d 1096, 1097-98 (9th Cir. 1997) (noting that, "[b]ecause Munoz has been released from the [secured housing unit], we can no longer provide him the primary relief sought in his habeas corpus petition").