Lanier v. Lindsay
This text of 107 F. App'x 86 (Lanier v. Lindsay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
David W. Lanier, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s order construing his habeas corpus petition, brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, as a motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and ordering the case transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. Relying upon Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 124 S.Ct. 786, 157 L.Ed.2d 778 (2003), Lanier contends that the district court erred in sua sponte recharacterizing his pro se petition as a § 2255 motion without notice and an opportunity to respond. Castro does not apply because this is not Lanier’s first § 2255 motion.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the [87]*87courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
107 F. App'x 86, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lanier-v-lindsay-ca9-2004.