Ortiz-Martinez

Ortiz-Martinez v. Herrera

Good Law
44 F. App'x 806
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 15, 2002No. 01-57012; D.C. No. CV-01-06374-DTCalifornia327 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Candido Ortiz-Martinez appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the propriety of his federal conviction and sentence for possession and distribution of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a), and using and carrying a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review the district court’s dismissal of a § 2241 petition de novo, see Tripati v. Henman, 843 F.2d 1160, 1162 (9th Cir.1988), and we affirm.

*807 Ortiz-Martinez has filed three unsuccessful § 2255 motions in Missouri district court. The first motion was denied on the merits, and the other two were deemed successive motions which the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to certify. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 . Ortiz-Martinez then filed a § 2241 petition in California district court, the district of his incarceration, contending that Section 2255 was inadequate or ineffective.

Ortiz-Martinez essentially argues that any further Section 2255 motion would be prohibited as successive, therefore, Section 2255 is an inadequate or ineffective remedy as applied to him. However, this court has made clear…

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.