Keup v. Rivera

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: This action is dismissed without prejudice, and this court will not issue a certificate of appealability. The court will enter a separate judgment in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
TYLER J. KEUP,
Petitioner,
v.
C. V. RIVERA, (Warden),
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:15CV335

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on a preliminary review of Tyler Keup’s habeas
corpus petition brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On September 23, 2013, Keup
pled guilty in this court to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute five grams or more of methamphetamine. (See USA v. Keup, Case No.
8:13-cr-00045-JFB-TDT.) In this case, he asks the court to declare his state court
conviction for manslaughter void so that he may be eligible for early release on his
federal sentence. Keup is incarcerated in a Federal Correctional Institution in Forrest
City, Arkansas. (Filing No. 1 at CM/ECF p. 1.)
This court does not have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 because Keup is
not incarcerated 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.”). Moreover, with
exceptions not relevant here, Keup cannot challenge his sentence under § 2255
because he “knowingly and expressly waive[d] any and all rights to contest [his]
conviction and sentence in any post-conviction proceedings, including any
proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.” (See 8:13-cr-00045-JFB-TDT at Filing No. 46.)

1

Accordingly, Keup is not entitled to the relief he seeks in this court under either
§§ 2241 or 2255.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: This action is dismissed without
prejudice, and this court will not issue a certificate of appealability. The court will
enter a separate judgment in accordance with this Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 22nd day of September, 2015.
BY THE COURT:

s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
Senior United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District
of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they
provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The
court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases
to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.

2