Baggett v. Warden FCI Low Beaumont
MEMORANDUM ORDER overruling objections and adopting 4 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 6/26/17. (tkd, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JOSHUA ALLEN BAGGETT
WARDEN, FCI BEAUMONT LOW
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17cv121
MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS AND
ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner Joshua Allen Baggett, an inmate confined at the Federal Correctional Complex in
Beaumont, Texas, proceeding pro se, brought this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241.
The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate
Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court.
The Magistrate Judge recommends the petition be dismissed.
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record and pleadings. Petitioner filed
objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. This requires a de novo review
of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
After careful consideration, the court concludes petitioner’s objections should be overruled.
Petitioner’s petition does not meet the criteria required to support a claim under the savings clause
of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424 (5th Cir. 2005); Reyes-Requena v.
United States, 243 F.3d. 893 (5th Cir. 2001). Additionally, the Eleventh Circuit, joining the Tenth
Circuit, held that “a change in caselaw does not make a motion to vacate a prisoner’s sentence
‘inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention,’ 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e).” McCarthan v.
Dir. of Goodwill Indus-Suncoast, Inc., 851 F. 3d 1076, 1086 (11th Cir. 2017) (overruling Wofford
v. Scott, 177 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 1999), Mackey v. Warden, FCC Coleman-Medium, 739 F.3d 657
(11th Cir. 2014); Bryant v. Warden, FCC Coleman-Medium, 738 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2013)).
“Allowing a prisoner to use the saving[s] clause to bring a statutory claim in a habeas petition
circumvents the bar on successive petitions. It does away with the one-year statute of limitations ...
[and] renders the process for obtaining permission to file a second or successive motion ... a nullity.”
Id. at 1091. Accordingly, the petition should be dismissed.
Accordingly, petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED.
The findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the report of the Magistrate Judge is
ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s
SIGNED this the 26 day of June, 2017.
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?