Esquivel v. Maiorana et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - This action is dismissed with prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered. No certificate of appealability will be issued by me. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(SLP)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
JAIME LAMON ESQUIVEL,
CHUCK MAIORANA, d.b.a.
RESPONDENT SUPERIORS, and
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Jaime Lamon Esquivel files frivolous motions and petitions, and I know this
because I have dealt with Mr. Esquivel many times before. With that experience in
mind, there are three reasons why I will dismiss this matter. I briefly set them forth
First Reason: To the extent that Esquivel challenges the execution of his
sentence (262 months in prison), I have no jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 since
Esquivel is not held in Nebraska. See Matheny v. Morrison, 307 F.3d 709, 711 (8th
Cir.2002) (“A petitioner may attack the execution of his sentence through § 2241 in
the district where he is incarcerated; a challenge to the validity of the sentence itself
must be brought under § 2255 in the district of the sentencing court.”).
Second Reason: In effect, this is an improper second or successive section 2255
motion and the Court of Appeals has not given Esquivel permission to proceed as
required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b), 2255(h). (See, for example, filing no. 190, filing
no. 191, filing no. 193, filing no. 194, filing no. 211, filing no. 212, filing 214, filing
no. 231, filing no. 232, and filing no. 233 in 4:06CR3027.)
Third Reason: Esquivel’s motion is frivolous. It is filled with nothing but
IT IS ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice. A separate
judgment will be entered. No certificate of appealability will be issued by me.
DATED this 15th day of July, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?