302 F.2d 725 - Sanchez v. Taylor — 302 F.2d 725

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently October 1984

22 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Barry D. Mock, Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellant.

R. Stanley Ditus, Asst. U.S. Atty. (Newell A. George, U.S. Atty., and Benjamin E. Franklin, Asst. U.S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.

Before PICKETT, LEWIS, and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

Sanchez, a federal prisoner confined at Leavenworth, Kansas, under multiple, unexpired sentences imposed in the District of Puerto Rico for various narcotic offenses, petitioned in the District of Kansas for habeas corpus and the writ was denied on the ground that the remedy under 28 U.S.C. 2255 was exclusive. We agree. The 2255 remedy is exclusive unless it is inadequate or ineffective. The only showing is that a motion under 2255 in the sentencing court was unsuccessful. That is not enough. Barrett v. United States, 10 Cir., 285 F.2d 758, 759; Williams v. United States, 10 Cir.,283 F.2d 59, 60. The denial of a motion made under 2255 does not, of itself, establish that the remedy provided by that section is either ineffective or inadequate.

¶2

Affirmed.