United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 21, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10395
Conference Calendar
RONNY OSBIN CUMMINGS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
L.E. FLEMING, Warden, Federal Medical Center-Fort Worth,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:03-CV-00270
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ronny Cummings, federal prisoner # 24611-034, convicted of
carjacking, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28
U.S.C. § 2241 petition for failing to satisfy the requirements of
28 U.S.C. § 2255's savings clause. Cummings argues that his
sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 2119(2) violated the Supreme Court
decision in Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227, 251-52 (1999),
because his indictment failed to allege that serious bodily
injury resulted during his offense. He states that he should be
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-10395
-2-
allowed to file the claim in a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition because
28 U.S.C. § 2255 is ineffective to test the legality of his
detention.
Cummings has not shown that he was convicted of an offense
which is now nonexistent based upon a retroactively applicable
Supreme Court decision. See Jeffers v. Chandler, 253 F.3d 827,
831 (5th Cir. 2001); Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d
893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001). Jones has no effect on whether the
facts of Cummings’s case support his conviction for carjacking
during which serious bodily injury resulted. See Wesson v. U.S.
Penitentiary, Beaumont, TX, 305 F.3d 343, 348 (5th Cir. 2002),
cert. denied, 123 S. Ct. 1374 (2003). Cummings has not met the
requirements to file his claim in a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition.
AFFIRMED.