Brian Ross Pump v. United States

Good Law
59 F.3d 176·1995 WL 353898·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23092
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 12, 199594-56563California514 words

Opinion

Opinion

59 F.3d 176 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Brian Ross PUMP, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-56563. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 6, 1995. * Decided June 12, 1995. Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Brian Ross Pump, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. Pump contends that he is entitled to credit to his federal sentence for presentence time spent in state custody. We review de novo, Tripati v. Henman, 843 F.2d 1160, 1162 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 982 (1988), and vacate and remand with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. 3 Generally, a federal prisoner who is challenging his federal conviction or his federal sentence must file a Sec. 2255 motion with the sentencing court. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988); Tripati, 843…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.