Bullette v. Lepe

Sep 1, 2026
26-1664

MEMORANDUM*

Federal prisoner Raymond Bullette appeals pro se from the district court‘s judgment dismissing without prejudice his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C § 1291. Reviewing de novo, Tripati v. Henman, 843 F.2d 1160, 1162 (9th Cir. 1988), we affirm.

Bullette‘s § 2241 petition alleged he is actually innocent of his mandatory life sentence because he was convicted of violating 21 U.S.C. § 846, not 21 U.S.C. § 841. He maintains this claim properly invoked the “escape hatch” or “saving clause” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). However, the saving clause is available only when “the remedy by [§ 2255] motion is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of [the prisoner‘s] detention.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). The district court correctly determined that § 2241 relief is unavailable because Bullette failed to demonstrate “unusual circumstances [that] make it impossible or impracticable [for him] to seek relief in the sentencing court.” Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. 465, 478 (2023).

AFFIRMED.

Notes

*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).