FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J AN 11, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO N OT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 10 79 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 0- cv -0 09 18 -TW T MIC HAEL PARTEE , ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Peti ti on er-Ap pe ll an t,
vers us ATTORNEY G ENERAL, STAT E OF GEORGIA, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Res po nd en t-Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e Nor th ern Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (J an ua ry 11 , 20 12 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, ED MONDSON, an d F AY, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: Mi ch ael Part ee, a fe de ral pri so ne r, ap pe al s pr o s eth e d is tri ctco urt’s di sm is sa l o f hi s p et it io n fo r writof h ab eas co rp us , fil edpu rs ua ntto 28 U.S.C.§ 2 25 4. Pa rte e fi le d h is § 2 25 4 p et it io n i n t he Dis tri ctCo urt fo r th e Nor th ern

Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a, ch al le ng in g h is two pri or Geor gi a dru g c on vi ct io ns , su st ai ne d in 19 96 , forwhi ch he ha d re cei ve d t wo co nc urren t, t wo- y ear s en te nc es . Part ee in di cat edin hi s p et it io n tha t h e was curren tl y servi ng a 32 4- m on th fed eral
se nt en ce i m

po se d b y th e Dis tri ctCo urt fo r th e Nor th ern Dis tri ctof I ll in oi s. InNov em

be r 20 10 , th e d is tri ctco urt d is m is se d P art ee’s § 22 54 pe ti ti on for la ckof s ub

ject m at te r juri sd ic ti on , fin di ng th athi s 1 99 6 s ta te sen te nc es ha d
ex pi redan d t ha t h e was no lo ng er “ in cu st od y ” wit hi n t he m ean in g o f § 2 25 4( a). The co urt n ot edth at , if Pa rte e wis he d t o c ha ll en ge hi s cu rren t fe de ral sen te nc e, he sh ou lddo so vi a a 2 8 U.S.C. § 22 55 m ot io n i n the co urt t ha t i m po se d t he
se nt en ce. 1 W e g ran te d P art ee a c ert ifi cat e o f ap pe al ab il it y (“ COA”) o n t he is su es of whe th er t he di st ric t co urt erredin fai li ng to co ns tru e h is § 2 25 4 p et it io n a s a § 2 25 5 m ot io n, an d wh et he r th e co urt s ho ul d h av e d is m is se d t he co ns tru ed§ 2 25 5
m ot io n fo r la ckof ju ris di ct io n a ndtra ns ferr edth e m ot io n t o t he Nort he rnDis tri ct of Ill in oi s, wh ere P art ee’s fed eral cri m in al jud gm en t was en te red
. Forth e rea so ns 2
Section 2254 allows a federa l district court to entertain a habeas petiti on of “a person in 1 custody pursuant to the judgme nt of a State court.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a)
. By co n t ra s t , § 2 2 5 5 g overns post-c onviction relief f or fe dera l prisoners. See28 U.S.C. § 2255. In his brief on appea l, Partee challeng es the dist rict court’s finding reg arding the “in 2 custody” requirement, but we do not addre ss this iss ue bec ause “ appellate revie w is limi ted t o the 2se t fo rth be lo w, we affi rm .

Inex am in in g adi st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f a § 22 54 habe as pe ti ti on , we rev ie w qu es ti on s o f la w de no vo . Gro ss man v. McDon ou gh , 46 6 F .3d13 25 , 13 35 (11 th Ci r. 20 06 ). Whe n afed eral pri so ne r se ek s t o c ha ll en ge anex pi redst at e se nt en ce th atwas u se d t o e nh an ce h is cu rren t fe de ral sen te nc e, he m us t b rin g s ui t u nd er § 2 25 5. Mea ns v. Ala ba ma , 20 9 F .3d12 41 , 12 42 (11 th Cir . 20 00 ).

“ It i s tru e th atfed eral co urts m us t l oo k b ey on d the lab el s o f m ot io ns fil edby pr o s e in m at es to in te rp retth em un de r wha te ve r st atut e wou ldpro vi de rel ie f.” Id

. Inth is cas e, ho wev er, co ns tru in g P art ee’s § 22 54 pe ti ti on as a§ 2 25 5 m ot io n
wou ldha ve be en fut il e, pr ov id in g n o re li ef. Sp eci fic al ly, Part ee re cei ve d h is fed eral sen te nc e in th e Nor th ern Dis tri ctof I ll in oi s, an d a § 22 55 m ot io n m us t b e fil edinth e “ co urt wh ic h i m po se d t he sen te nc e.” 2 8 U.S.C. § 22 55 (a); se e Med be rr y v. Cr os by , 35 1 F .3d10 49 , 10 56 -5 7 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 3) (ex pl ai ni ng th at § 2 25 5 a ll ev ia te d p ro cedur al di ffi cu lt ie s “ by dir ect in g p ris on ers to fil e th e m ot io n in th e co urt wh ere t he y

were co nv ic te d” ). Acco rd in gl y , eve n i f th e d is tri ctco urt ha d c on st ru edth e § 22 54 pe ti ti on as a§ 2 25 5 m ot io n, i t wo ul d h av e la ck ed juri sd ic ti on ov er t he m ot io n a ndwou ldha ve be en requi redto di sm is s t he cas e. Se e Owen sb

y v. Cl ark , 45 1 F .2d20 6, 2 07 -0 9 (5 th Cir . 19 71 ) (h ol di ng th ata no nissues specifie d in the COA.” Murray v . United States , 145 F.3d 1249, 1251 ( 11th Cir. 1998). 3se nt en ci ng di st ric t co urt h adno juri sd ic ti on to he ar a p ris on er’s h ab eas pe ti ti on

be cau se th e p ris on er co ul d h av e o bt ai ne d re li ef t hr ou gh a § 2 25 5 m ot io n, wh ic h sh ou ldha ve be en fil edin th e d is tri ctco urt t ha t s en te nc edhi m). Part ee m ig htha ve rece iv edso m e rel ie f if th e d is tri ctco urt h adtra ns ferr ed hi s co ns tru ed§ 2 25 5 m ot io n t o t he ap pr op ria te di st ric t u nd er 2 8 U.S.C. § 16 31 , whi chall ows a di st ric t co urt t o t ran sf er a ca se ov er wh ic h i t l ack s ju ris di ct io n i f
su ch a tr an sf

er i s “ in th e in te res t o f jus ti ce.” Se e 28 U.S.C. § 1 63 1. Ho wev er, a si gn ifi can t fa ct orin th e in te res t-o f-jus ti ce an al y si s i s wh ethe r a d en ia l o f a tran sf er
wou ldeffe ct iv el y

ba r th e p la in ti ff fro m

rel ie f inth e p ro pe r co urt. Se e Gue nthe r v. Hol t , 17 3 F .3d13 28 , 13 31 (11 th Cir . 19 99 ) (h ol di ng th atth e in te res ts of ju st ic e di d n otwarran t a § 16 31 tra ns fer o f a p ris on er’s h ab eas pe ti ti on be cau se , aft er t he di st ric t co urt h addi sm is se d h is pe ti ti on , th e p ris on er h adth ree m on th s wi th in th e li m it at io ns pe rio d i n wh ic h t o p ro pe rly refil e th e p et it io n, an d t he m ag is tra te ’s rep ort an d re co m

m en da ti on no ti fie d t he pri so ne r of th e n eces sa ry

pro cedur e fo r do in g s o)
. Inth is cas e, atth e ti m e th e d is tri ctco urt d is m is se d P art ee’s § 22 54 pe ti ti on , no th in g b arre d h im

fro m refi li ng th e p et it io n a s a § 22 55 m ot io n i n t he pro pe r
co urt. The on e-year st atut e o f li m it at io ns forfil in g § 22 55 m ot io ns be ga n t o ru n fo r Part ee o n Oct ob er 1 8, 2 01 0, wh enth e Supr em e Co urt d en ie d c ert io rari in hi s
4di rectap pe al , ren de rin g h is fed eral co nv ic ti on fin al
. Se e 28 U.S.C. § 2 25 5( f);

Par te e v. Uni te d Sta tes , 56 2 U.S. _ _, 1 31 S.Ct . 43 9, 1 78 L.Ed.2d34 0 (2 01 0) (d en y in g c ert io rari inPart ee’s d ire ctap pe al ); W as hi ng to n v . Uni te d Sta tes , 24 3 F.3 d 1 29 9, 1 30 0- 01 (11 th Cir . 20 01 ) (h ol di ng th ata co nv ic ti on be co m es fin al for pu rp os es of § 22 55 when th e Supr em e Co urt d en ie s ce rti or ari ). The d is tri ctco urt di sm is se d h is § 2 25 4 p et it io n i n No ve m be r 20 10 , gi vi ng hi m

am pl e o pp ortu ni ty (al m os t a year) t o fi le a § 2 25 5 m ot io n i n t he pro pe r di st ric t b efo re t he st atut e o f li m it at io ns ex pi red
. Se e W as hi ng to n , 24 3 F .3dat 1 30 0- 01 . In fa ct , th e co urt al ert edPart ee t o t hi s o pp ortu ni ty by st at in g t ha t a c ha ll en ge to hi s fe de ral sen te nc e
m us t b e b ro ug htvi a a § 22 55 m ot io n i n the Ill in oi s d is tri ctco urt. Acco rd in gl y , th e

“ in te res t o f jus ti ce” wo ul d n otha ve warran te d atra ns fer o f Part ee’s § 22 55
m ot io n. Se e 28 U.S.C. § 1 63 1; Guen th er , 17 3 F .3dat 1 33 1. Bec au se co ns tru in g P art ee’s h ab eas pe ti ti on as a§ 2 25 5 m ot io n wo ul d h av e
res ul te d i n adi sm is sa l fo r la ckof ju ris di ct io n a ndwou ldno t h av e g ran te d P art ee
an y rel ie f, th e d is tri ctco urt d idno t err by fail in g t o c on st ru e h is pe ti ti on as s uc h. Se e Mea ns , 20 9 F .3dat 1 24 2. Th eref or e, we affi rm . AFFIRMED.

5