Opinion
No. CV 10-0071-TUC-RCC (CRP)
12-20-2011
Robert Meeks, Petitioner, v. Conrad M. Graber, Respondent.
ORDER
Petitioner Robert Meeks, who is confined in the Federal Correctional Institution-Safford, filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Docs. 10, 12). On August 31, 2011, the Honorable Charles R. Pyle, United States Magistrate Judge, filed a Report and Recommendation ("Recommendation") in this action. (Doc. 33). The Recommendation advised the Court to DENY the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.
Petitioner thereafter filed objections to the Recommendation. (Doc. 35). Petitioner argues in his Petitioner and objections that Johnson v. United States, 130 S.Ct. 1265 (2010), represents newly decided that renders him actually innocent of twice violating 28 U.S.C. § 924(c). Magistrate Judge Pyle disagreed because Johnson's holding was limited to construing language in 28 U.S.C. § 924(e) and is inapposite to this case. He further concluded the Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain this Petition because Petitioner's claim does not fall within the savings clause of § 2241.
Having reading Johnson and all other relevant authorities, the Court finds that is does not constitute new law relevant to Petitioner's convictions. Since Johnson is not new relevant law, this Petition does not fall within § 2241's savings clause, and the Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the Petitioner. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Pyle's Recommendation. (Doc. 33).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitioner's Petition (Docs. 10, 12) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioner's Motion to Amend Objection Number Six (Doc. 37).
____________
Raner C. Collins
United States District Judge