Background
Adam Shane Swindle, a federal prisoner, sought to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal from the dismissal of his section two thousand two hundred forty-one petition. He challenged his convictions for receipt and possession of child pornography and claimed his Eighth Amendment rights were violated. He contended he was actually innocent and that his claims met the requirements of the section two thousand two hundred fifty-five saving clause.
The court’s reasoning
The court noted that a section two thousand two hundred forty-one petition challenging trial and sentencing errors must generally be construed as a section two thousand two hundred fifty-five motion or be dismissed. While a section two thousand two hundred forty-one petition attacking custody from a federally imposed sentence may be entertained under the saving clause if the remedy under section two thousand two hundred fifty-five is inadequate or ineffective, the petitioner must establish unusual circumstances making it impossible or impracticable to seek relief in the sentencing court. The court found Swindle had not raised a nonfrivolous issue showing such circumstances, noting that the Supreme Court in Jones rejected an argument for an equitable exception for actual innocence.
What it means going forward
The appeal was dismissed as frivolous and the motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied, leaving the district court’s dismissal of the habeas petition in place.