Case ID: f-appx_168/html/0634-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Roy Lee RUSSELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Constance REESE, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 04-41242.
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided Feb. 23, 2006.
    Roy L. Russell, Federal Correctional Institution Oxford, Oxford, WI, pro se.
    Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Roy Lee Russell, federal prisoner # 21767-009, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging the 110-month sentence imposed following his jury trial conviction for obstruction of justice and perjury. Russell argues that his sentence was unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004) because it was based on drug quantities not determined by the jury. He contends that he is entitled to seek relief under § 2241 because 28 U.S.C. § 2255 offers an inadequate remedy.

Because Russell’s petition challenges errors that occurred at sentencing, the claim may not be brought in a § 2241 petition. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 426-27 (5th Cir.2005). Russell’s argument that he is entitled to proceed under § 2241 based on the savings clause of § 2255 because relief under that section is “inadequate or ineffective” is unavailing. Id. at 427. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.