Adam Martin v. Kris Kline

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 22, 202119-15605California918 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 22 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ADAM EUGENE MARTIN, No. 19-15605

Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:17-cv-00371-JGZ

v.

MEMORANDUM

KRIS KLINE, Warden,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Jennifer Zipps, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted December 7, 2021 San Francisco, California

Before: WARDLAW, BRESS, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

Adam Martin, a federal prisoner, petitioned the district court for habeas relief

under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The district court denied Martin’s petition, holding that it

lacked jurisdiction to consider a petition brought under § 2241 because Martin did

not meet the requirements set out in § 2255(e), known as the escape hatch provision.

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Martin appeals the dismissal of his petition. We review the district court’s decision

de novo, Stephens v. Herrera, 464 F.3d 895,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.