USCA4 Appeal: 23-6488 Doc: 8 Filed: 10/03/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6488

DEMETRIOS DONELL MCNEILL, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN R. RAMOS; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:22-hc-02134-M-RJ)

Submitted: September 28, 2023 Decided: October 3, 2023

Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Demetrios Donell McNeill, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6488 Doc: 8 Filed: 10/03/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Demetrios Donell McNeill, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order and judgment dismissing without prejudice McNeill’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought to challenge his conviction and sentence by way of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Supreme Court has held “that § 2255(e)’s savings clause does not permit a prisoner asserting an intervening change in statutory interpretation to circumvent [the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996]’s restrictions on second or successive § 2255 motions by filing a § 2241 petition.” Jones v. Hendrix, 143 S. Ct. 1857, 1864 (2023). Thus, McNeill may not now assert that he is actually innocent of his 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction due to an alleged change in the statutory interpretation of the statute. We also conclude that the district court did not err in finding that McNeill was ineligible for sentencing time credits. See 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)(D)(xxii). Accordingly, We affirm the district court’s order and judgment. McNeill v. Ramos, No. 5:22-hc-02134- M-RJ (E.D.N.C. Apr. 12, 2023). 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