Angelo Galloway v. Eric Wilson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [1000011808-2]; denying Motion for other relief [1000012775-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999958412-2] Originating case number: 2:16-cv-00348-MSD-LRL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000060495]. Mailed to: Angelo Galloway FCI PETERSBURG LOW FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 1000 Petersburg, VA 23804-0000. [16-7436]

Appeal: 16-7436

Doc: 14

Filed: 04/12/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7436

ANGELO GALLOWAY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ERIC WILSON,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00348-MSD-LRL)

Submitted: February 28, 2017

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Angelo Galloway, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Decided: April 12, 2017

Appeal: 16-7436

Doc: 14

Filed: 04/12/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Angelo Galloway, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order dismissing
his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition for lack of jurisdiction. We review the district
court’s dismissal order de novo. See Yi v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 412 F.3d 526, 530
(4th Cir. 2005). Upon a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the district court
properly determined that it lacked authority to consider the merits of Galloway’s claims
under § 2241, as he failed to demonstrate that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) was “inadequate
or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e); see In re Jones,
226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000) (describing test).
Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we modify the
district court’s dismissal to one without prejudice and affirm as modified for the reasons
stated by the district court. Galloway v. Wilson, No. 2:16-cv-00348-MSD-LRL (E.D.
Va. Oct. 4, 2016); see S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Ass’n, Inc. v. OpenBand at
Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013) (recognizing that dismissal for
defect in subject matter jurisdiction “must be one without prejudice”).

We deny

Galloway’s motions for bail or release pending appeal and for summary judgment. 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 AS MODIFIED

2