Case Name: Demetreous A. BROWN, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant v. Rodney W. CHANDLER, FCI-Fort Worth, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-07-07
Citations: 606 F. App'x 267
Docket Number: No. 14-11025
Parties: Demetreous A. BROWN, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant v. Rodney W. CHANDLER, FCI-Fort Worth, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 606
Pages: 267–268

Head Matter:
Demetreous A. BROWN, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant v. Rodney W. CHANDLER, FCI-Fort Worth, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 14-11025
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 7, 2015.
Demetreous A. Brown, Sr. Atlanta, GA, pro se.
Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Demetreous A. Brown, Sr., federal prisoner # 07860-028, appeals the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his conviction of one count of conspiring with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine and more than five kilograms of a substance containing cocaine, eleven counts of distributing crack cocaine, and one count of possessing a firearm as a felon. We review that dismissal de novo. See Garland v. Roy, 615 F.3d 391, 396 (5th Cir.2010). Brown failed to show that he met the requirements of the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.2001). Accordingly, the district court did not err in dismissing Brown's § 2241 petition. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 452 (5th Cir.2000).
Brown has abandoned by failing to brief any challenge to the district court's denial of his alternative motion for writ of audita querela. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993); Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).
All pending motions are DENIED, and 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.