Case Name: Michael Anthony CASTRO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. R.D. MILES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-04-21
Citations: 95 F. App'x 551
Docket Number: No. 03-41765
Parties: Michael Anthony CASTRO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. R.D. MILES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 95
Pages: 551–552

Head Matter:
Michael Anthony CASTRO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. R.D. MILES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 03-41765.
Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 21, 2004.
Michael Anthony Castro, #65029-080, Beaumont, TX, pro se.
Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Michael Anthony Castro, federal prisoner # 65029-080, filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging the sentence he received as a result of his 1993 conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The district court dismissed the petition and Castro timely appealed. Castro argues that his prior convictions were improperly used to enhance his sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing. Castro has failed to identify a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that he may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense. His claim, therefore, does not satisfy the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and he is not entitled to utilize 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 903-04 (5th Cir.2001).
This appeal is without arguable merit and, therefore, it is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Additionally, Castro's petition is repetitious. Castro has previously filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging this same conviction and raising identical claims. Castro v. Chandler, 31 Fed.Appx. 160 (5th Cir.2001) (unpublished) (affirming dismissal of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition). Castro is warned that any future frivolous pleadings under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging this conviction will invite the imposition of sanctions
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.