Rodriguez v. Head

Case: 20-40800 Document: 00516262358 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2022

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 31, 2022 No. 20-40800

Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

Roel Rodriguez,

Petitioner—Appellant, versus

Butch Head,

Respondent—Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:20-CV-102

Before Barksdale, Costa, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Proceeding pro se, Roel Rodriguez, federal prisoner # 87325-379, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, challenging his conviction Case: 20-40800 Document: 00516262358 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2022

No. 20-40800 and sentence for conspiracy to: possess, with intent to distribute, 1,000 kilograms or more of marihuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), 846; and launder monetary instruments, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(2)(B)(i)–(ii), 1956(h), 2. The district court concluded that Rodriguez failed to satisfy the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Rodriguez’ challenge to his conviction and sentence is not based on retroactively-applicable Supreme Court decisions that establish he may have been convicted of nonexistent drug and money-laundering conspiracy offenses. See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001) (articulating savings-clause test). He, therefore, fails to meet his burden of showing that a § 2255 remedy “is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention”. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e); see also Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 452 (5th Cir. 2000) (noting “a section 2241 petition that seeks to challenge a federal sentence or conviction—thereby effectively acting as a section 2255 motion—may only be entertained when the petitioner establishes that the remedy provided . . . under section 2255 is inadequate or ineffective”). To the extent Rodriguez contends our court should expand the savings-clause test to encompass challenges to a sentence, as well as nonexistent convictions, his challenge is unavailing. See Reyes-Requena, 243 F.3d at 904. AFFIRMED.