Case Name: Bobby Norris McAFEE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-23
Citations: 169 F. App'x 260
Docket Number: No. 05-40942
Parties: Bobby Norris McAFEE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 169
Pages: 260–260

Head Matter:
Bobby Norris McAFEE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 05-40942.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Feb. 23, 2006.
Bobby Norris McAfee, Federal Correctional Institution Beaumont, Beaumont, TX, for Petitioner-Appellant.
Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Bobby Norris McAfee, a federal prisoner (# 25170-177), appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging his 235-month prison sentence imposed following his 1993 guilty-plea conviction of a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act offense. McAfee contends that his sentence is unconstitutional in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).
Because McAfee challenges errors that occurred at sentencing, the claim may not be asserted in a § 2241 petition. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 426-27 (5th Cir.2005). Insofar as he has suggested that he is entitled to proceed under § 2241 based on the "savings clause" of 28 U.S.C. § 2255, because relief under the latter section is "inadequate or ineffective," such suggestion is unavailing. Id. at 427. 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.