IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-41061
Conference Calendar
REGINALD S. CARR,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
EARNEST V. CHANDLER, Warden; JOHN ASHCROFT,
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondents-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:01-CV-549
--------------------
June 19, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Reginald S. Carr (Carr), federal prisoner #23755-044,
appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
petition for lack of jurisdiction. Carr argues that he is
entitled to bring his claims that his indictment was defective
and that his trial counsel was ineffective under the “savings
clause” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-41061
-2-
Carr has not shown that his remedy under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his
detention. See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 901
(5th Cir. 2001). Specifically, he has not shown that his claims
are “based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision
which establishes that [he] may have been convicted of a
nonexistent offense” and that the claims were “foreclosed by
circuit law at the time when the claim[s] should have been raised
in [his] trial, appeal, or first 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion.” Id.
at 904. Therefore, the district court did not err in determining
that Carr could not bring his claims under the savings clause of
28 U.S.C. § 2255.
AFFIRMED.