Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/134/383/562414/
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 09:54:50+00:00

Document:
PAUL J. KELLY, Jr., Circuit Judge.
Petitioner-appellant Peggy Sandoval, appearing pro se, appeals from the denial of her habeas petition, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and dismissal of the action for lack of jurisdiction. The district court denied a certificate of appealability and it does not appear that Ms. Sandoval has applied for one in this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2). Despite the invocation of various constitutional provisions and claims for general relief, the petition was properly construed as a collateral attack on the conviction. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's conclusion that Ms. Sandoval could not satisfy the "in custody" requirement of habeas corpus based solely on a speeding conviction resulting in a $30.00 fine and a $17.00 assessment of court costs. See United States v. Watroba, 56 F.3d 28, 29 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 269 (1995) ( § 2255); United States v. Segler, 37 F.3d 1131, 1137 (5th Cir. 1994) (same); Spring v. Caldwell, 692 F.2d 994, 999 (5th Cir. 1982) ( § 2254). We agree.
We construe Ms. Sandoval's opening brief as an application for a certificate of appealability, DENY it, and DISMISS the appeal.

References: § 2254
 § 2253
 v. 
 § 2255
 v. 
 v. 
 § 2254