USCA4 Appeal: 24-6042 Doc: 15 Filed: 09/24/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6042

JOHN MARTIN SPAULDING, Petitioner - Appellant, v. J. C. STREEVAL, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:22-cv-00118-JPJ-PMS)

Submitted: September 19, 2024 Decided: September 24, 2024

Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Martin Spaulding, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6042 Doc: 15 Filed: 09/24/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: John Martin Spaulding, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which Spaulding sought to challenge his convictions and sentence by way of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Pursuant to § 2255(e), a prisoner may challenge his conviction and sentence in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to § 2241 only if a § 2255 motion would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. 465, 477-80 (2023) (holding that petitioner cannot use § 2241 petition to mount successive collateral attack on validity of federal conviction or sentence), we conclude that the district court correctly determined that Spaulding cannot pursue his claims in a § 2241 petition. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Spaulding v. Streeval, No. 7:22-cv-00118-JPJ-PMS (W.D. Va. Jan. 9, 2024). 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