RODRIGUEZ v. STREEVAL (2021)

Danny A. Rodriguez, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought to challenge his convictions and sentence by way of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and denying his motion for reconsideration. Pursuant to § 2255(e), a prisoner may challenge his convictions and sentence in a traditional writ of habeas corpus under § 2241 if a § 2255 motion would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention. Here, the district court correctly determined that Rodriguez may not challenge the validity of his convictions and sentence through a § 2241 petition. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rodriguez v. Streeval, No. 7:20-cv-00308-NKM-JCH, 2020 WL 3000591 (W.D. Va. June 4, 2020). In addition, we decline to address Rodriguez's argument pursuant to Rehaif v. United States, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S.Ct. 2191, 204 L.Ed.2d 594 (2019), that his 2004 convictions were unconstitutional because he seeks to attack a different district court judgment than the one underlying the current appeal. We deny Rodriguez's motion to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.