United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 18, 2004
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-10351
Conference Calendar
DOMINGO RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
K.J. WENDT, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:03-CV-2443-N
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Domingo Rodriguez, prisoner number 66479-079, was convicted
of conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute and
sentenced to 240 months in prison and a ten-year term of
supervised release. Rodriguez filed a purported 28 U.S.C. § 2241
petition to challenge this sentence. The district court
determined that Rodriguez’s purported 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition
was best construed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissed it.
Rodriguez now appeals that dismissal. He argues that he should
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-10351
-2-
be permitted to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 because he is
actually innocent of a state conviction that was used to enhance
his federal sentence.
The district court’s findings of fact are reviewed for clear
error, and issues of law are reviewed de novo. Jeffers v.
Chandler, 253 F.3d 827, 830 (5th Cir. 2001). Rodriguez has not
shown that the district court erred in construing his pleading as
a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion that should be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. See Tolliver v. Dobre, 211 F.3d 876, 877-78 (5th
Cir. 2000); Cox v. Warden, Fed. Detention Ctr., 911 F.2d 1111,
1113 (5th Cir. 1990); Solsona v. Warden, 821 F.2d 1129, 1132 (5th
Cir. 1987). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.