David Antoine Luster v. Warden R. M. Wolfe

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6412
DAVID ANTOINE LUSTER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN R. M. WOLFE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Clarksburg. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (1:21-cv-00084-JPB)
Submitted: June 28, 2022 Decided: July 1, 2022
Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Antoine Luster, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
David Antoine Luster, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting
the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on Luster’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241
petition, in which he sought to challenge his convictions and sentence by way of the savings
clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Pursuant to § 2255(e), a prisoner may challenge his
convictions and sentence in a traditional writ of habeas corpus under § 2241 if a § 2255
motion would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. Here, the
district court correctly determined that Luster may not challenge the validity of his
convictions and sentence through a § 2241 petition, as the conduct for which he was
convicted remains criminal, In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000), and he failed
to identify a retroactive change in the substantive law affecting his sentence, United
States v. Wheeler, 886 F.3d 415, 429 (4th Cir. 2018). Accordingly, we affirm the district
court’s order. Luster v. Wolfe, No. 1:21-cv-00084-JPB (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 29, 2022). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --