Sherman Meirovitz v. Anthony Haynes, No. 13-3726 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Prisoner case - Habeas. Dismissal of Section 2241 petition was appropriate as plaintiff failed to show the section 2255 remedy was inadequate or ineffective.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-3726 ___________________________ Sherman Ray Meirovitz lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Anthony Haynes, Warden, FCI - Forrest City lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena ____________ Submitted: July 14, 2014 Filed: July 17, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before MURPHY, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Sherman Meirovitz appeals the district court s1 dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which he raised the same claim that was rejected by this court in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding. See Meirovitz v. United States, 688 F.3d 369, 37072 (8th Cir. 2012). After careful review, we agree with the district court that Meirovitz did not show the section 2255 remedy was inadequate or ineffective. See Lopez-Lopez v. Sanders, 590 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable H. David Young, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
