Filed: Oct. 24, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-41487 Summary Calendar WILLIAM M. BOYCE, Petitioner-Appellant, versus ERNEST V. CHANDLER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:01-CV-630 - October 22, 2002 Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 William M. Boyce, federal prisoner #03336-088, appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Boyce argues that 28 U.S.C.
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-41487 Summary Calendar WILLIAM M. BOYCE, Petitioner-Appellant, versus ERNEST V. CHANDLER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:01-CV-630 - October 22, 2002 Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 William M. Boyce, federal prisoner #03336-088, appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Boyce argues that 28 U.S.C. ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-41487
Summary Calendar
WILLIAM M. BOYCE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
ERNEST V. CHANDLER, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:01-CV-630
--------------------
October 22, 2002
Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
William M. Boyce, federal prisoner #03336-088, appeals from
the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Boyce argues that 28
U.S.C. § 2255 was inadequate to test the legality of his
incarceration, allowing him to pursue 28 U.S.C. § 2241 relief,
because Apprendi v. New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466 (2000), was decided
after his conviction became final and after he filed his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 motion.
1
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
Apprendi does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral
review. Wesson v. U.S. Penitentiary, ___ F.3d ___ (5th Cir.
Sep. 5, 2002),
2002 WL 31006173, *3. Boyce cannot make a showing
sufficient to invoke the “savings clause” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to
pursue 28 U.S.C. § 2241 relief.
Id.
AFFIRMED.
2