Filed: Aug. 28, 2006
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 August 28, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-10999 Conference Calendar ROSALINDA MIRANDA, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GINNY VAN BUREN, Warden, Federal Medical Center, Carswell, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CV-421 - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rosalinda M
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 28, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-10999 Conference Calendar ROSALINDA MIRANDA, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GINNY VAN BUREN, Warden, Federal Medical Center, Carswell, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CV-421 - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rosalinda Mi..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 28, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-10999
Conference Calendar
ROSALINDA MIRANDA,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GINNY VAN BUREN, Warden, Federal Medical Center, Carswell,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CV-421
--------------------
Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rosalinda Miranda, federal prisoner # 79975-079, appeals the
dismissal of her 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, which challenged her
1998 drug conspiracy conviction and sentence. She challenged her
conviction and sentence pursuant to United States v. Booker,
543
U.S. 220 (2005).
Because Miranda challenged errors that occurred at or before
sentencing, her claim could not be asserted in a § 2241 petition.
See Tolliver v. Dobre,
211 F.3d 876, 877 (5th Cir. 2000).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-10999
-2-
Moreover, her Booker claim may not proceed under the savings
clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Padilla v. United States,
416
F.3d 424, 426-27 (5th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, the district
court’s dismissal of Miranda’s § 2241 petition is AFFIRMED.