Charles Pollock, Jr. v. Matthew Marske

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2570

___________________________

Charles W. Pollock, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant

v.

Warden Matthew Marske; Jeremy Nerdstadt; Jill Slegh

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondents - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota

____________

Submitted: April 21, 2022 Filed: April 26, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Charles Pollock appeals after the district court1 denied his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, which challenged his custody classification within the Bureau of Prisons. After careful review, we conclude the district court correctly determined it did not have jurisdiction over the section 2241 petition. See Hill v. Morrison, 349 F.3d 1089, 1091 (8th Cir. 2003) (district court’s dismissal of § 2241 petition reviewed de novo); Kruger v. Erickson, 77 F.3d 1071, 1073 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (if prisoner is not challenging validity of conviction or length of detention, habeas corpus is not proper remedy). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1 The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Becky R. Thorson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.