Court Opinion

ID: 9891186
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-17 19:00:34.132671+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:39:39.182200
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       OCT 17 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PHILLIP CAMILLO-AMISANO,                        No. 21-55877

                Petitioner-Appellant,           D.C. No. 2:21-cv-00072-ODW-JDE

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM *
FELICIA PONCE, Warden,

                Respondent-Appellee.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Central District of California
                   Otis D. Wright II, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted October 10, 2023**

Before:      S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

      Appellee’s motion to lift the stay in these proceedings is granted. The stay

of this action, entered on November 22, 2022, is lifted.

      Federal prisoner Phillip Camillo-Amisano appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, see Pinson v. Carvajal,

69 F.4th 1059, 1063 (9th Cir. 2023), we affirm.

      Camillo-Amisano contends that the district court erred by concluding that

his claim regarding the conditions of his confinement due to the COVID-19

pandemic was not cognizable in a § 2241 habeas petition. Contrary to Camillo-

Amisano’s contention, the fact that he was seeking immediate release is

insufficient to invoke habeas jurisdiction. See id. at 1072-73 (“[A] successful

claim sounding in habeas necessarily results in release, but a claim seeking release

does not necessarily sound in habeas.”). Rather, Camillo-Amisano needed to show

that his detention is without legal authorization. See id. at 1070. Because he failed

to do so, the district court properly dismissed his petition. See id. at 1073-75

(holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction over a § 2241 petition seeking

release on the basis of prison conditions arising from the COVID-19 pandemic).

      The record demonstrates that the Department of Justice received and denied

Camillo-Amisano’s request to be transferred to Canada, contradicting his

contention that prison officials intentionally interfered with his transfer request by

taking no action on it.

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2                                    21-55877