Filed: Dec. 08, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 9, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-40771 Conference Calendar WILLIAM J. R. EMBREY, Petitoner-Appellant, versus MELVIN MORRISON, Warden; UNITED STATES CONGRESS; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:02-CV-844 - Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circ
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 9, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-40771 Conference Calendar WILLIAM J. R. EMBREY, Petitoner-Appellant, versus MELVIN MORRISON, Warden; UNITED STATES CONGRESS; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:02-CV-844 - Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circu..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 9, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-40771
Conference Calendar
WILLIAM J. R. EMBREY,
Petitoner-Appellant,
versus
MELVIN MORRISON, Warden; UNITED STATES
CONGRESS; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondents-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:02-CV-844
--------------------
Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
William J.R. Embrey, federal prisoner #87263-132, appeals
the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas
corpus petition, which challenged his conviction for felony
possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
Embrey argues that his conviction was invalid under United States
v. Emerson,
270 F.3d 203 (5th Cir. 2001). He also cites various
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 03-40771
-2-
Supreme Court cases decided before he was convicted of the noted
offense.
Although Embrey could proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 if he
demonstrated that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 relief was “inadequate or
ineffective” under the latter statute’s “savings clause,” he has
failed to make such a showing. See Reyes-Requena v. United
States,
243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001). Accordingly, the
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.