Tony Washington v. Richard Hudgins ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 20-7286
    TONY WASHINGTON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    RICHARD HUDGINS,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
    Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:20-cv-00086-JPB)
    Submitted: January 19, 2021                                       Decided: January 22, 2021
    Before AGEE, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Tony Washington, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Tony Washington, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order adopting the
    magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on Washington’s 
    28 U.S.C. § 2241
    petition in which Washington sought to challenge his conviction by way of the savings
    clause in 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
    . Pursuant to § 2255(e), a prisoner may challenge his conviction
    in a traditional writ of habeas corpus pursuant to § 2241 if a § 2255 motion would be
    inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.
    [Section] 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of a
    conviction when: (1) at the time of conviction, settled law of this circuit or
    the Supreme Court established the legality of the conviction; (2) subsequent
    to the prisoner’s direct appeal and first § 2255 motion, the substantive law
    changed such that the conduct of which the prisoner was convicted is deemed
    not to be criminal; and (3) the prisoner cannot satisfy the gatekeeping
    provisions of § 2255 because the new rule is not one of constitutional law.
    In re Jones, 
    226 F.3d 328
    , 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000).
    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
    for the reasons stated by the district court. Washington v. Hudgins, No. 5:20-cv-00086-
    JPB (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 21, 2020). We also deny Washington’s motion for transcripts at
    government expense.       We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-7286

Filed Date: 1/22/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/22/2021