Court Opinion

ID: 9785028
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 21:01:11.387562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:16.923361
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6178      Doc: 10         Filed: 08/29/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-6178

        KENNETH LEON RIVERS,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        WARDEN FCI WILLIAMSBURG,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:21-cv-03154-BHH)

        Submitted: August 24, 2023                                        Decided: August 29, 2023

        Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Kenneth Leon Rivers, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6178      Doc: 10          Filed: 08/29/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Kenneth Leon Rivers appeals the district court’s order accepting the

        recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Rivers’ 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition

        for lack of jurisdiction. In light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jones v. Hendrix,

        143 S. Ct. 1857, 1867-69 (2023) (holding that petitioner cannot use § 2241 petition to

        mount successive collateral attack on validity of federal sentence), we conclude that Rivers

        cannot pursue his claims in a § 2241 petition.

               Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order dismissing Rivers’ § 2241 petition.

        We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

        presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

        process.

                                                                                         AFFIRMED

                                                      2