Filed: May 28, 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 May 28, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-30008 Summary Calendar EUGENE MORRIS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus CARL CASTERLINE, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 02-CV-1939 - Before REAVLEY, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eugene Morris, federal prisoner number 21068-009, appeals t
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS May 28, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-30008 Summary Calendar EUGENE MORRIS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus CARL CASTERLINE, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 02-CV-1939 - Before REAVLEY, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eugene Morris, federal prisoner number 21068-009, appeals th..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
May 28, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-30008
Summary Calendar
EUGENE MORRIS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
CARL CASTERLINE,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 02-CV-1939
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eugene Morris, federal prisoner number 21068-009, appeals
the district court’s order denying and dismissing with prejudice
his application for writ of habeas corpus. Morris argues that
the district court erred in finding that he did not satisfy the
requirements for filing a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition under 28
U.S.C. § 2255’s “savings clause.”
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-30008
-2-
Morris has not met his burden of showing that he meets the
requirements for filing a § 2241 petition under the savings
clause of § 2255. He has neither pointed to a retroactively
applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that he may
have been imprisoned for conduct that was not prohibited by law
nor shown how his claim was foreclosed by circuit law at the time
of his guilty-plea conviction, appeal, or first § 2255 motion.
See Reyes-Requena v. United States,
243 F.3d 893, 903-04 (5th
Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.