Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher L. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-02-27
Citations: 463 F. App'x 287
Docket Number: No. 11-60474
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher L. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 463
Pages: 287–287

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher L. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-60474
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 27, 2012.
Gaines H. Cleveland, Assistant U.S. Attorney, John Arthur Meynardie, Esq., U.S. Attorney’s Office, Gulfport, MS, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Christopher Johnson, Pollock, LA, pro se.
Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Following his conviction for one charge of possessing between five and 50 grams of cocaine base with intent to distribute, Christopher L. Johnson, prisoner # 07372-043, was sentenced to serve 188 months in prison and a five-year term of supervised release. Johnson filed a motion requesting a nunc pro tunc judgment that is best construed as arising under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 because it raised a claim seeking credit towards Johnson's federal sentence for time previously spent in state custody. See United States v. Brown, 753 F.2d 455, 456 (5th Cir.1985). The district court denied Johnson's motion, and he now moves this court for authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal.
Our review of the record and pertinent authority shows that the district court, which sentenced Johnson, lacked jurisdiction over Johnson's § 2241 petition because this petition should have been filed in the district where he was incarcerated. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451 (5th Cir.2000). Consequently, the district court should have dismissed Johnson's § 2241 petition for want of jurisdiction. Johnson's motion to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.