Court Opinion

ID: 9415480
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 18:54:52.444939+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:54.289831
License: Public Domain

COX, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
The majority opinion heroically formulates a general rule to harmonize § 2255’s procedural hurdles and its “savings clause.” I hesitate to be so bold, however, when the evidence of congressional intent is as sparse as what we have here.
I agree that Wofford’s challenges to his sentence are not cognizable under § 2241. I also agree that the remedy by motion under § 2255 is not rendered “inadequate or ineffective” because an individual is procedurally barred from filing a second or successive § 2255 motion. That’s all I need decide in this case, and I therefore would not attempt to formulate a general rule to harmonize the statutory language.