Jacob Adams, Jr. v. United States
690 F. App'x 789
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Jacob Adams Jr. was convicted in 2002 in the D.N.J. of three bank robberies (18 U.S.C. § 2113) and three § 924(c) firearm counts and sentenced to 610 months.
- The Third Circuit affirmed the conviction but remanded for Booker resentencing; the district court reimposed the same sentence and the Third Circuit affirmed on remand.
- Adams filed a § 2255 motion raising ineffective assistance and Confrontation Clause claims; the district court denied relief and the Third Circuit affirmed.
- In December 2015 Adams filed a § 2241 habeas petition in the district of confinement, arguing the indictment failed to charge a violation of § 2113(f) (the statutory definition of “bank”), so the district court lacked jurisdiction.
- The district court dismissed the § 2241 petition for lack of jurisdiction under the § 2255 ‘‘safety valve’’ doctrine (In re Dorsainvil), and denied reconsideration; Adams appealed.
- The Third Circuit summarily affirmed, holding Adams could not use § 2241 because § 2255 was not inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Adams may challenge his conviction under § 2241 because § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective (Dorsainvil safety valve) | Adams: indictment failed to allege § 2113(f) so the district court lacked jurisdiction; jurisdictional defects can be raised anytime, so § 2255 is inadequate | District Court/Government: § 2255 is the proper remedy; Adams had prior opportunities to raise the claim; absence of relief or inability to meet successive-motion gates does not make § 2255 inadequate | Held: § 2255 is not inadequate or ineffective here; § 2241 petition properly dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (sentencing guidelines held advisory; remand for resentencing)
- Cradle v. United States ex rel. Miner, 290 F.3d 536 (3d Cir. 2002) (standards for § 2241 review and rejection of jurisdictional-always-appealable argument)
- Okereke v. United States, 307 F.3d 117 (3d Cir. 2002) (describing narrow circumstances where § 2255 is inadequate)
- In re Dorsainvil, 119 F.3d 245 (3d Cir. 1997) (establishing the § 2255 ‘‘safety valve’’ allowing § 2241 in rare cases)
- Lazaridis v. Wehmer, 591 F.3d 666 (3d Cir. 2010) (procedural rule on appealability when reconsideration and notice of appeal were timely filed)