Williams v. Warden, et al, No. 11-13306 (11th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePetitioner appealed the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. 2241 petition for habeas corpus, claiming that his 293-month sentence for a violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) and the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. 924(e), was improper because he did not have the three violent felony predicates required to apply the ACCA enhancement. At issue was whether the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. 2255(e) allowed the district court to entertain petitioner's section 2241 petition and, if it did, whether petitioner's 1989 and 1990 burglary convictions were proper ACCA predicates. In these circumstances, petitioner's direct appeal and first collateral attack were not inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention, and the savings clause did not apply. The court concluded that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to entertain petitioner's section 2241 petition and, therefore, affirmed the judgment.
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.