United States of America, Appellee v. William Armstead, Appellant

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

United States of America, Appellee v. William Armstead, Appellant

No. 16-3115

Decided: June 12, 2017

BEFORE: Griffith, Srinivasan, and Pillard, Circuit Judges

ORDER

Upon consideration of appellant's brief, which is construed as including a request for a certificate of appealability; the motion to dismiss for lack of a certificate of appealability; and the motion for summary affirmance and the response thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion for a certificate of appealability be denied and that the motion to dismiss for lack of a certificate of appealability be granted. Appellant has not demonstrated either that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether he has stated a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right or that it is debatable whether the district court was correct in ruling that his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court properly denied appellant's 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition on the ground appellant failed to show that his remedy by way of a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was “inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e); see In re Smith, 285 F.3d at 6, 8 (D.C. Cir. 2002); Abdullah v. Hedrick, 392 F.3d 957, 959 (8th Cir. 2004) (“§ 2255 is not inadequate or ineffective merely because ․ a remedy under that section is time-barred.”).

Pursuant to D.C. Cir. Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. Because no certificate of appealability has been allowed with respect to the denial of the § 2255 motion, no mandate will issue as to that portion of this case. With respect to the appeal from the denial of the § 2241 motion, the Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam