U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2013

Victor Wilkes v. Warden, FCI Edgefield

Victor Wilkes v. Warden, FCI Edgefield
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided June 5, 2013 · Shedd, Diaz, Thacker
523 F. App'x 224

Victor Wilkes v. Warden, FCI Edgefield

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Victor Glen Wilkes, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We further find that the district court correctly rejected Wilkes’ alternative request for a writ of audita querela because he had available another remedy, a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. * Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wilkes v. Warden, No. 8:12-cv-03046-TLW (D.S.C. Dec. 10, 2012; Jan. 16, 2013). 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.

*

The fact that Wilkes cannot proceed under § 2255 unless he obtains authorization from this court to file a successive motion does not alter this conclusion. United States v. Valdez-Pacheco, 237 F.3d 1077, 1080 (9th Cir. 2001) (“We agree with our sister circuits ... that a federal prisoner may not challenge a conviction or sentence by way of a petition for a writ of audita querela when that challenge is cognizable under § 2255.”).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.