Case Name: Manuel Raul Reyo Pena Garcia MONTERO, also known as Reyes Pena, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George W. BUSH, President of the United States, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-09-09
Citations: 108 F. App'x 908
Docket Number: No. 04-40645
Parties: Manuel Raul Reyo Pena Garcia MONTERO, also known as Reyes Pena, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George W. BUSH, President of the United States, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 108
Pages: 908–908

Head Matter:
Manuel Raul Reyo Pena Garcia MONTERO, also known as Reyes Pena, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George W. BUSH, President of the United States, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-40645.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Sept. 9, 2004.
Manuel Raul Reyo Pena Montero, Leavenworth, KS, pro se.
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Manuel Raul Reyo Pena Garcia Montero (Montero), federal prisoner # 09794-GOO, appeals from the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition as frivolous. Specifically, the district court determined that Montero's arguments concerning President Bush's legitimacy and constitutional authority did not relate to the manner in which Montero's sentence was being carried out or to the determination of its duration.
Because Montero is not incarcerated in Texas, the district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain his petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Lee v. Wetzel, 244 F.3d 370, 373-75 (5th Cir.2001) (ruling that "the district of incarceration is the only district that has jurisdiction to entertain a defendant's § 2241 petition"). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED and the case is REMANDED with instructions to DISMISS Montero's 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
VACATED AND REMANDED with instructions.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.