Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-22-06493/USCOURTS-ca4-22-06493-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6493

GREGORY K. CLINTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

MR. WOLFE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:21-cv-00058-GMG)

Submitted: December 19, 2024 Decided: December 23, 2024

Before KING and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory K. Clinton, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6493 Doc: 48 Filed: 12/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Gregory K. Clinton, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting 

the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Clinton’s 

28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which Clinton sought to challenge the validity of his 

convictions. We affirm.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e)’s savings clause, a federal prisoner may challenge the 

validity of his conviction in a § 2241 petition only if the remedies afforded in § 2255 are 

inadequate or ineffective. The scope of the savings clause is narrow, “covering unusual 

circumstances in which it is impossible or impracticable for a prisoner to seek relief from 

the sentencing court.” Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. 465, 474 (2023). 

We conclude that the savings clause does not apply to the challenges Clinton raises 

in his § 2241 petition. Accordingly, we grant Clinton’s motions to amend his informal 

brief, deny the remainder of his pending motions, and affirm the district court’s order. 

Clinton v. Wolfe, No. 3:21-cv-00058-GMG (N.D. W. Va. Apr. 8, 2022). 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

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6493 Doc: 48 Filed: 12/23/2024 Pg: 2 of 2