Lawrence Kenemore, Jr. v. Keith Roy, 690 F.3d 639

Kenemore convicted of conspiracy to mail fraud, conspiracy to embezzle funds from 401(k)/ERISA plans, conspiracy to launder money, mail fraud, embezzlement from employee benefit plans, money laundering, and making a false statement to the DOL.
After losing on direct appeal and in a prior habeas petition, Kenemore filed a new §2241 petition seeking relief.
He argues the Supreme Court’s GVR in Jackson v. United States constitutes retroactive, substantive law showing he was convicted of a nonexistent offense.
GVR remanded for reconsideration without addressing merits; Kenemore claims it used the same “assets” definition that Jackson deemed improper.
The district court denied relief; the Fifth Circuit affirms, holding GVR is not retroactive and does not satisfy Reyes-Requena’s savings clause.
GVR does not constitute a final merits decision and cannot render a conviction invalid on collateral review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a GVR can be retroactive relief under the savings clause	Kenemore relies on Jackson GVR as retroactive	GVR is not a final merits decision and not retroactive	GVR not retroactive; Reyes-Requena not satisfied

Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893 (5th Cir. 2001) (savings clause controls retroactive review on collateral attack)
Jackson v. United States, 555 U.S. 1163 (Supreme Court 2009 (mem.)) (GVR remand; not a merits decision)
West v. Vaughn, 204 F.3d 53 (3d Cir. 2000) (GVR not dispositive of merits; remand conditions vary)
Lawrence ex rel. Lawrence v. Charter, 516 U.S. 163 (Supreme Court 1996) (GVR considerations may lead to reconsideration but not merits ruling)
Henry v. City of Rock Hill, 376 U.S. 776 (1964) (GVR not determinative; retroactivity depends on merits)