IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-41349
Conference Calendar
ARTHUR LEE LAWS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; E.V. CHANDLER, Warden,
Respondents-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:00-CV-549
- - - - - - - - - -
June 14, 2001
Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Arthur Lee Laws, federal prisoner #49045-080, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in
which he challenged the legality of his sentence. Laws argues
that his claim was properly brought in a § 2241 petition because
relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is inadequate as he cannot meet the
requirements for filing a successive § 2255 motion.
Although he purports to rely on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530
U.S. 466 (2000), the true nature of Laws’ claim is that the
Sentencing Guidelines were incorrectly applied in his case. This
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-41349
-2-
claim is not cognizable in a § 2255 motion. See United States v.
Segler, 37 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 1994). This is a
nonconstitutional claim that could have been raised on direct
appeal. Id. The fact that Laws cannot raise the issue in a
§ 2255 motion does not make that remedy inadequate.
The district court did not err in determining that Laws had
failed to show that relief under § 2255 was inadequate and did
not err in dismissing his § 2241 petition. Accordingly, its
judgment is AFFIRMED.