Case Name: Conrado Acosta RODRIGUEZ, also known as Conrado Acosta, Petitioner-Appellant v. Jason JONES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-05-21
Citations: 533 F. App'x 463
Docket Number: No. 12-10931
Parties: Conrado Acosta RODRIGUEZ, also known as Conrado Acosta, Petitioner-Appellant v. Jason JONES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 533
Pages: 463–464

Head Matter:
Conrado Acosta RODRIGUEZ, also known as Conrado Acosta, Petitioner-Appellant v. Jason JONES, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 12-10931
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
May 21, 2013.
Conrado Acosta Rodriguez, Big Spring, TX, pro se.
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Conrado Acosta-Rodriguez, federal prisoner # 27173-198, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which he challenged his sentence of 252 months of imprisonment for his 2000 conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine. Acosta-Rodriguez states that he is in custody for a "non-existent career offender conviction." He asserts that he meets the requirements of the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because he is actually innocent of being a career offender. He makes no attempt to argue how the remainder of his substantive claims satisfy the savings clause.
Acosta-Rodriguez's claim based on an alleged error in applying the career offender sentencing enhancement may not be asserted in this § 2241 petition because it fails to satisfy the requirements of the savings clause in § 2255. See Kinder v. Purdy, 222 F.3d 209, 213-14 (5th Cir.2000). The district court properly dismissed Acosta-Rodriguez's § 2241 petition for lack of jurisdiction. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 426-27 (5th Cir.2005).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.