Alvis Damon Williams v. R. HUDGINS, Warden

20-7870Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit2 de ago. de 2023

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7870
ALVIS DAMON WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
R. HUDGINS, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:20-cv-00119-JPB)
Submitted: July 17, 2023 Decided: August 2, 2023
Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Alvis Damon Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Maximillian Fitzsimmons Nogay, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Alvis Damon Williams, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order adopting
the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing without prejudice Williams’
28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought to challenge his 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)
conviction under Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019), by way of the savings
clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). The Supreme Court has squarely held “that § 2255(e)’s
savings clause does not permit a prisoner asserting an intervening change in statutory
interpretation to circumvent [the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996]’s
restrictions on second or successive § 2255 motions by filing a § 2241 petition.” Jones v.
Hendrix, 143 S. Ct. 1857, 1864 (2023). Like the petitioner in Jones, Williams may not
challenge his § 922(g)(1) conviction based on Rehaif through a § 2241 petition by way of
§ 2255(e)’s savings clause. See id. Accordingly, we deny Williams’ motion to remand
and affirm the district court’s judgment. Williams v. Hudgins, No. 5:20-cv-00119-JPB
(N.D.W. Va. Dec. 2, 2020). 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 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.