Opinion
22-6226
08-23-2022
BLAKE SANDLAIN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN C. MARUKA, FCI McDowell, Respondent - Appellee
Blake Sandlain, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: August 18, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:20-cv-00358)
Blake Sandlain, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WYNN, THACKER, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Blake Sandlain, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and denying relief on Sandlain's 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. He also appeals from the district court's denial of 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 Sandlain may not challenge the validity of his convictions and sentence through a § 2241 petition, as the conduct for which he was convicted remains criminal, In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000), and he failed to identify a retroactive change in the substantive law affecting his sentence, United States v. Wheeler, 886 F.3d 415, 429 (4th Cir. 2018). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sandlain v. Maruka, No. 1:20-cv-00358 (S.D. W.Va. Jan. 25, 2022 &Feb. 14, 2022). 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