Jones v. Hamidullah

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6203 CORNELIUS JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MATTHEW B. HAMIDULLAH; ALBERTO GONZALES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. David C. Norton, District Judge. (6:05-cv-00439-DCN) Submitted: March 15, 2006 Decided: July 21, 2006 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cornelius Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Cornelius Jones filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), which the district court construed as a successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Jones appeals this order and the order denying his motion for reconsideration. Although the district court construed the § 2241 petition as a § 2255 motion, Jones clearly intended to file a § 2241 petition. Jones asserts on appeal that § 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of his detention and contends that his claims should be considered in the context of his § 2241 petition. Because Jones does not meet the standard set forth in In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000), we affirm the denial of relief and the court’s denial of Jones’ motion for reconsideration. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED - 2 -