Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s section 2241 petition seeking stay of his September 24, 2020 death penalty execution, even though defendant argued that his trial counsel was ineffective because he labored under conflict of interest and failed to represent him competently during sentencing, and that district judge should have recused himself from trial and sentencing hearing because of his alleged alcoholism. Defendant could not proceed under section 2241, because instant issues are commonly entertained and resolved under provisions set forth in 28 USC section 2255, and record showed that 5th Cir. Ct. of Appeals rejected instant claims in defendant’s section 2255 petition. Fact that defendant did not prevail in his section 2255 petition or that 5th Cir. resolved his section 2255 petition by denying his request for certificates of appealability did not entitle him to another collateral attack. Also, defendant failed to cite to any new and retroactive legal rule or any facts that came to light after 5th Cir.’s denial to support his section 2241 petition.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Habeas Corpus