Filed: Feb. 13, 2007
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 February 13, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-30292 Conference Calendar BILLY LAMPTON, Petitioner-Appellant, versus FREDRICK MENIFEE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:05-CV-1623 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Billy Lampton, federal prisoner # 250
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 13, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-30292 Conference Calendar BILLY LAMPTON, Petitioner-Appellant, versus FREDRICK MENIFEE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:05-CV-1623 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Billy Lampton, federal prisoner # 2507..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 13, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-30292
Conference Calendar
BILLY LAMPTON,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
FREDRICK MENIFEE, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 1:05-CV-1623
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Billy Lampton, federal prisoner # 25078-034, appeals the
district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition
challenging his conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal
enterprise. Lampton argues that he is actually innocent of
engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise under this court’s
decision in United States v. Bass,
310 F.3d 321 (5th Cir. 2002).
He maintains that he may bring his claim in a § 2241 petition
under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because Bass
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-30292
-2-
resolved a question of first impression in this court,
demonstrating that his claim was foreclosed prior to Bass.
We review the district court’s findings of fact for clear
error and its conclusions of law de novo. See Christopher v.
Miles,
342 F.3d 378, 381 (5th Cir. 2003). Lampton’s claim relies
upon our decision in Bass, and Lampton does not cite to any new
Supreme Court cases in support of his claim. As he has not shown
that his claim is based upon a retroactively applicable Supreme
Court decision that decriminalized the conduct for which he was
convicted, Lampton has not made the required showing to challenge
his conviction in a § 2241 petition. See
id. at 382.
AFFIRMED.