United States v. Patrick Holsworth

367 F. App'x 809
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 25, 2010
Docket09-30162
StatusUnpublished

This text of 367 F. App'x 809 (United States v. Patrick Holsworth) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Patrick Holsworth, 367 F. App'x 809 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Patrick Jerome Holsworth (Holsworth) appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to prevent exercise of jurisdiction by the United States Parole Commission over him.

*810 Holsworth asserted that the district court had jurisdiction over his motion pursuant to Rule 47 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 47, however, is procedural in nature and does not provide a basis for jurisdiction in federal court. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 47. Because the district court lacked jurisdiction, it lacked authority to address the merits of Hols-worth’s motion. See Mayfield v. United States, 588 F.3d 1252, 1258 (9th Cir.2009).

VACATED AND REMANDED FOR DISMISSAL.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mayfield v. United States
588 F.3d 1252 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
367 F. App'x 809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-patrick-holsworth-ca9-2010.