The opinion of the court was delivered by: Pratter, J.
Amil Gonzales has filed a pro se petition for habeas corpus pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code § 2241*fn1. The upshot of Mr. Gonzales's petition is two-fold: he seeks to reduce the length of the 5-year period of supervised release to which he was sentenced, and he wants the Court to modify the condition of supervision that permits the assigned probation officer to make home inspections of Mr. Gonzales's residence while he is on supervision.
Mr. Gonzales is presently confined at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York, in the Eastern District of New York. Because Mr. Gonzales is not confined here in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, even if it was appropriate in substance, his §2241 petition for habeas corpus relief cannot be filed in this District. By express requirement of the statute itself, his petition must be filed only in the federal district where Mr. Gonzales is imprisoned, i.e., the Eastern District of New York. See Yi v. Maugans, 24 F. 3d 500, 503 (3rd Cir. 1994); United States v. Kennedy, 851 F. 2d 689, 690 (3rd Cir. 1988); United States v. Ferri, 686 F. 2d 147, 158 (3rd Cir. 1982).
Here, even if Mr. Gonzales did not have the geographical and jurisdictional bar addressed above, his §2241 petition would have to be denied because his only avenue at this time to challenge the terms and conditions of any aspect of his federal sentence is by means of a Section 2255 application to the sentencing court. Hill v. United States, 368 U.S. 424, 427 (1962)*fn2. He has not invoked Section 2255.
Finally, if the Court were to construe Mr. Gonzales's petition as a proper request for a modification of his term and/or conditions of his supervised release*fn3, the Court would not grant such a request because, at best, it is premature*fn4 and, in any case, no justification to alter any of the conditions has been presented*fn5.
Accordingly, this petition will be dismissed in toto.
Gene E. K. Pratter United States ...