United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT January 16, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 06-30621 Clerk
Summary Calendar
GABRIEL JENNINGS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
FREDDICK MENIFEE,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
No. 1:05-CV-1483
--------------------
Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gabriel Jennings, a federal prisoner, appeals the dismissal of
his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition wherein he challenges his conviction
under the federal arson statute, 18 U.S.C. § 844(i). The district
court dismissed the petition as an abuse of the writ because Jen-
nings had raised the same claim in an earlier § 2241 petition. We
review de novo the dismissal of a § 2241 petition on the pleadings.
Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451 (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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-30621
-2-
Jennings challenges his arson conviction under Jones v. United
States, 529 U.S. 848 (2000). He argues that the issue in his cur-
rent petition is whether he was convicted of a nonexistent offense
under Jones. He posits that he did not raise this same issue in
his prior petition, where, he asserts, he claimed that the district
court improperly instructed the jury.
Based on our review of the record and Jennings’s pleadings in
his prior petition, both in the district court and on appeal, we
conclude that Jennings raised the same challenge to his conviction
based on the holding in Jones and the alleged lack of an interstate
commerce element to his offense. The district court did not err by
holding that Jennings’s instant petition fails to raise a new issue
and is an abuse of the writ. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(a); United
States v. Tubwell, 37 F.3d 175, 177-78 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.