Riddick v. Miles

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 17, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-40151
Conference Calendar
HARRY LEE RIDDICK,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
RICHARD D. MILES, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:05-CV-295
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Harry Lee Riddick, federal prisoner # 48116-060, appeals
from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Riddick
challenges his conviction of operating a continuing criminal
enterprise, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute
cocaine, distribution of cocaine in or near a school, and
distribution of cocaine.
Riddick seeks relief pursuant to United States v. Booker,
543 U.S. 220 (2005); Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004);
and Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813 (1999). Riddick’s

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 06-40151
-2-
Booker and Blakely claims do not fall under the “savings clause”
of 28 U.S.C. § 2255; he thus may not pursue relief under § 2241.
See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 427 (5th Cir. 2005).
Riddick’s appellate brief indicates that he knew about Richardson
before he filed his § 2255 motion in 2001; he therefore could
have raised his Richardson issues in that motion and may not
pursue them in a § 2241 petition. See Reyes-Requena v. United
States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --