IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-40365
Conference Calendar
VICTOR MICHAEL MACIAS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
N. L. CONNER, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:01-CV-51
--------------------
October 29, 2002
Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Victor Michael Macias, federal prisoner # 63420-080, appeals
the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition,
asserting that he is actually innocent of the crime to which he
pleaded guilty and that the indictment was invalid. As the
district court determined, because Macias’ petition challenges
his conviction and sentence, it is really a 28 U.S.C. § 2255
motion. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 452 (5th Cir. 2000);
Tolliver v. Dobre, 211 F.3d 876, 877-78 (5th Cir. 2000).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-40365
-2-
Although Macias could proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 if he
demonstrated that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 relief was inadequate or
ineffective, Macias has made no such showing. He does not argue
that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is inadequate in his appellate brief, and
he has therefore abandoned the argument. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). For the first time in his
reply brief, Macias conclusionally argues that 28 U.S.C. § 2255
is ineffective, but this court will not consider arguments raised
for the first time in a reply brief. See United States v.
Prince, 868 F.2d 1379, 1386 (5th Cir. 1989). Even if the court
were to consider the argument, Macias offers no reason why 28
U.S.C. § 2255 relief is inadequate in his case and has thus
failed to make the required showing.
Macias has not demonstrated any error in the district
court’s judgment. Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.