Filed: Dec. 21, 2004
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 21, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-10630 Summary Calendar ADRIAN ROSALES, Petitioner-Appellant, versus BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CV-115 - Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Adrian Rosales, Texa
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 21, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-10630 Summary Calendar ADRIAN ROSALES, Petitioner-Appellant, versus BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CV-115 - Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Adrian Rosales, Texas..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 21, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-10630
Summary Calendar
ADRIAN ROSALES,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:03-CV-115
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Adrian Rosales, Texas prisoner # 1015463, appeals from the
district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in
which sued the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement to
attack his 2002 removal order. The district court held that it
lacked jurisdiction over the petition because Rosales, who is
currently serving a 65-year state sentence for aggravated
kidnaping, is not is not in custody on any immigration charge.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 04-10630
-2-
Rosales has not demonstrated error in the district court's
determination that he failed to meet the “in custody” requirement
for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 jurisdiction. See Zolicoffer v.
United States Dep’t of Justice,
315 F.3d 538, 540 (5th Cir.
2003); United States ex rel. Marcello v. Dist. Director, INS,
634 F.2d 964, 970 (5th Cir. 1981).
AFFIRMED.