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. 06-10231 Conference Calendar JOHNNY WILLIAM IRONS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus DAN JOSLIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CV-2534 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Johnny William Irons, federal prisoner
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. 06-10231 Conference Calendar JOHNNY WILLIAM IRONS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus DAN JOSLIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CV-2534 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Johnny William Irons, federal prisoner #..
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. 06-10231
Conference Calendar
JOHNNY WILLIAM IRONS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
DAN JOSLIN, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:05-CV-2534
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Johnny William Irons, federal prisoner # 26283-077, appeals
the dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas
petition. He challenged his conviction for conspiracy to
distribute 50 grams or more of crack cocaine in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846.
Irons has not shown that the district court erred in
construing his purported § 2241 petition as an unauthorized
successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See Reyes-Requena v. United
States,
243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001). Irons’s contention
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-10231
-2-
that his claims under Blakely v. Washington,
542 U.S. 296 (2004),
and United States v. Booker,
543 U.S. 220 (2005), fall under
§ 2255’s savings clause is incorrect. See Padilla v. United
States,
416 F.3d 424, 427 (5th Cir. 2005). The judgment of the
district court is affirmed. Irons is warned that the filing of
frivolous pleadings in the future will subject him to sanctions.
AFFIRMED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.