Filed: Aug. 09, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Case: 19-30023 Document: 00515070278 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 19-30023 FILED Summary Calendar August 9, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ERIC L. JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant v. CALVIN JOHNSON, Warden, United States Penitentiary Pollock, Respondent-Appellee Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:18-CV-963 Before JOLLY, JONES, and SOUTH
Summary: Case: 19-30023 Document: 00515070278 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 19-30023 FILED Summary Calendar August 9, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ERIC L. JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant v. CALVIN JOHNSON, Warden, United States Penitentiary Pollock, Respondent-Appellee Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:18-CV-963 Before JOLLY, JONES, and SOUTHW..
More
Case: 19-30023 Document: 00515070278 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2019
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 19-30023 FILED
Summary Calendar August 9, 2019
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
ERIC L. JACKSON,
Petitioner-Appellant
v.
CALVIN JOHNSON, Warden, United States Penitentiary Pollock,
Respondent-Appellee
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 1:18-CV-963
Before JOLLY, JONES, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Eric L. Jackson, federal prisoner # 03936-087, appeals the district court’s
dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Jackson argues that recent caselaw
has made clear that his prior New York drug conviction was not divisible and
no longer qualifies as a predicate felony offense for purposes of a sentence
enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 851. Mathis v. United States,
136 S. Ct. 2243
(2016). We review the district court’s legal determinations de novo and its
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Case: 19-30023 Document: 00515070278 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2019
No. 19-30023
factual findings for clear error. Padilla v. United States,
416 F.3d 424, 425 (5th
Cir. 2005).
Generally, a federal prisoner must seek relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 if
he wishes to challenge his conviction or sentence.
Id. at 425-26. However, he
may raise claims in a Section 2241 petition where the remedy under
Section 2255 is inadequate or ineffective and thus the claims fall within the
savings clause of Section 2255(e).
Id. at 426. He must establish that his claims
(1) are “based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision that
establishes that he may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense” and (2)
were “foreclosed by circuit law at the time” of his trial, direct appeal, or first
Section 2255 motion. Reyes-Requena v. United States,
243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th
Cir. 2001). To meet the first prong, he must show “that based on a retroactively
applicable Supreme Court decision, he was convicted for conduct that did not
constitute a crime.” Jeffers v. Chandler,
253 F.3d 827, 831 (5th Cir. 2001).
Jackson disputes his enhanced sentence, not the underlying conviction.
Challenges to the validity of a sentencing enhancement do not satisfy the
savings clause of § 2255(e). See, e.g., In re Bradford,
660 F.3d 226, 230 (5th
Cir. 2011);
Padilla, 416 F.3d at 427.
AFFIRMED.
2