Cargill v. Morrison

¶1 Manley Cargill, federal prisoner #41436-004, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which he challenged his convictions for a continuing criminal enterprise and drug conspiracies pursuant to Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S. 292, 116 S.Ct. 1241, 134 L.Ed.2d 419 (1996). Cargill cannot establish that he meets the standard for filing a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition under the “savings clause” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because Rutledge was available at the time Cargill filed his first 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.2001). Cargill is incorrect in his assertion that Rutledge was unavailable at the time he filed his first 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion because such a claim would have been untimely. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 116; United States v. Flores, 135 F.3d 1000, 1005-06 (5th Cir.1998). The “savings clause” does not violate the Suspension Clause of the Constitution. Reyes-Requena, 243 F.3d at 901 n. 19. Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.