Case Name: Juan Gerardo ROJAS, Appellant, v. Craig APKER, Warden, USP, Tucson, Arizona, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-06-05
Citations: 470 F. App'x 522
Docket Number: No. 11-3458
Parties: Juan Gerardo ROJAS, Appellant, v. Craig APKER, Warden, USP, Tucson, Arizona, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 470
Pages: 522–523

Head Matter:
Juan Gerardo ROJAS, Appellant, v. Craig APKER, Warden, USP, Tucson, Arizona, Appellee.
No. 11-3458.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: May 23, 2012.
Filed: June 5, 2012.
Juan Gerardo Rojas, U.S. Penitentiary, Tucson, AZ, pro se.
Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Juan Rojas appeals from the district court's order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus which he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Generally, a federal inmate's exclusive remedy for collaterally attacking the constitutional validity of his sentence is through a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion filed in the sentencing court, unless he shows the remedy afforded by section 2255 is inadequate or ineffective. See Lopez-Lopez v. Sanders, 590 F.3d 905, 906 (8th Cir.2010). Because Rojas failed to show that section 2255 was inadequate or ineffective, the district court properly denied the petition. See Abdullah v. Hedrick, 392 F.3d 957, 964 (where petitioner failed to demonstrate that § 2255 was inadequate or ineffective remedy, district court properly dismissed § 2241 petition for lack of jurisdiction).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota.