William E. Hutchings Von Ludwitz v. United States of America Mark A. Henry, Warden, Terminal Island Federal Prison

17 F.3d 394 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William E. HUTCHINGS VON LUDWITZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Mark A. Henry, Warden, Terminal Island Federal Prison, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-55698. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 20, 1993. * Decided Jan. 7, 1994. Before: SNEED, NOONAN and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 William E. Hutchings Von Ludwitz, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 . We review the de novo, Grady v. Crabtree, 958 F.2d 874, 874 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). We affirm. 3 "A section 2255 motion to the sentencing court is generally the appropriate vehicle for challenging a conviction" obtained in federal court. Tripati v. Henman, 843 F.2d 1160, 1162 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 982 (1988). A prisoner authorized to apply for 2255 relief may not instead bring a…