Gammon v. United States

2008 DNH 022

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: January 28, 2008
• Docket: 07-CV-333-SM
• Status: Published

Opinion

Gammon v. United States 07-CV-333-SM 01/28/08 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Frank J. Gammon

v. Civil No. 07-cv-333-SM Opinion No. 2008 DNH 022 United States of America

O R D E R

Petitioner has filed a pleading ostensibly seeking relief

from his conviction and sentence under the provisions of 28

U.S.C. § 2255. However, his claims seem to be entirely related

to the current conditions of his federal confinement,

particularly allegedly deficient medical care.

With respect to his asserted challenge to his conviction and

sentence, this court is without jurisdiction to consider the

matter since he filed an earlier § 2255 petition in 2001 (Case

No. 01-cv-435-M). Therefore, the current petition is a second or

successive petition for which permission to file must first be

obtained from the court of appeals. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Para.

7.

Secondly, to the extent petitioner seeks relief from his

sentence for violating the term of his supervised release, he

raises no meritorious issues. The petition and the files and records of the case conclusively show that petitioner is entitled

to no relief in that the violation was established, the sentence

was lawful, and was within this court's jurisdiction, and no

denial or infringement of any constitutional right occurred. In

fact, petitioner makes no such claim.

Petitioner is complaining about medical care provided by the

Bureau of Prisons, and his best avenue for relief in that regard

is the administrative remedies available to him, or, if those

fail, legal remedies in the jurisdiction in which he is held.

See, e.g.. 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Transferring this petition to the court of appeals for its

consideration rather than dismissing it here would merely impose

an unwarranted burden on that court since petitioner makes no

effort to justify a second petition, and, the asserted grounds do

not warrant relief under § 2255.

The petition is dismissed.

SO ORDERED.

Sbeven J./McAuliffe Criief Judge January 28, 2008

cc: Frank J. Gammon, pro se Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, Esq.