Bourgeois v. Watson

Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendant’s motion to stay his death penalty execution, where defendant had filed section 2241 habeas petition that challenged his death penalty under Federal Death Penalty Act and Supreme Court decision in Atkins, 536 U.S. 304, both of which forbid execution of intellectually disabled offenders. Record showed that defendant had fully litigated in prior section 2255 habeas petition his claim that he was intellectually disabled, and defendant could not proceed on instant section 2241, where he failed to establish that his case fit within narrow “savings clause” exception contained in 28 USC section 2255(e), which required showing that his prior section 2255 petition was “inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.” Fact that defendant was unsuccessful in prior section 2255 petition or that Supreme Ct. refined, subsequent to resolution of prior 2255 petition, relevant legal standards for determining whether defendant is intellectually disabled did not mean that prior section 2255 petition was either “inadequate or ineffective.” Moreover, savings clause is limited to prevent fundamental errors that section 2255 petition could not have corrected, and defendant had opportunity to fully litigate his intellectual disability claim in prior section 2255 petition. As such, Ct. remanded case back to Dist. Ct. with instructions to deny motion to stay execution and to dismiss instant section 2241 petition.