Antoine Powell v. Rodney Chandler, No. 13-10713 (5th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on December 23, 2013.

Download PDF

Case: 13-10713 Document: 00512480715 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/23/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 13-10713 Summary Calendar FILED December 23, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ANTOINE EARL POWELL, Petitioner-Appellant v. RODNEY W. CHANDLER, Respondent-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14-CV-493 Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Antoine Earl Powell, federal prisoner # 56375-180, appeals from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his sentence following his guilty plea to possession with the intent to distribute at least 50 grams of crack cocaine and possession of a firearm during the commission of a drug trafficking crime. We review the dismissal de novo. Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451 (5th Cir. 2000). Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 13-10713 Document: 00512480715 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/23/2013 No. 13-10713 As the district court determined, Powell seeks to challenge the validity of his sentence rather than the manner in which his sentence has been executed, his petition properly arises under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Id. at 451-52. A § 2255 motion must be brought by the movant in the court that sentenced him. § 2255(a); Ojo v. INS, 106 F.3d 680, 683 (5th Cir. 1997). The district court did not impose the sentence at issue; thus, it did not err by dismissing the petition rather than construing it as a § 2255 motion. See Ojo, 106 F.3d at 683. The judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.